EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


EUROPE 

SINCE    1870 

BY 
EDWARD  RAYMOND  TURNER,  Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  EUROPEAN  HISTORY 

IN    THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  MICHIGAN 

AUTHOR   OF 

"EUROPE,  1789-1920,"  ETC. 


GARDEN   CITY,  N.  Y.,    AND    TORONTO 

DOUBLEDAY,    PAGE   &   COMPANY 
1921 


3]  61  9 


COPYRIGHT,  1921,  BT 

DOUBLEDAY,  PAGE  A  COMPANY 

ALL  RIGHTS  RESERVED,  INCLUDING  THAT  OF 

TRANSLATION  INTO  FOREIGN  LANGUAGES, 

INCLUDING  THE  SCANDINAVIAN 


/ 


TO 
MY    BROTHER 

JAMES  FLYNN  TURNER 

WITH 
GRATITUDE    AND    AFFECTION 

MCMXXI 


355' 


PREFACE 

The  author  has  attempted  an  outline  of  the  history  of 
Europe  in  the  last  fifty  years,  an  era  which  began  with  the 
victories  of  the  Germans  in  1870  and  ended  with  the 
destruction  of  their  empire. 

No  period  can  be  more  interesting  to  the  present  student 
of  events.  The  history  of  Europe  during  this  half  century 
was,  indeed,  the  larger  part  of  the  history  of  all  of  the 
world,  for  most  of  the  world's  population  was  controlled 
by  European  powers  or  else  associated  with  them  and 
directly  affected  by  their  fate.  The  events  of  this  time 
have  touched  the  lives  and  the  fortunes  of  most  men  and 
women  now  living.  Successive  years  were  thronged  wath 
vast  developments  and  crowded  with  a  multitude  of  per- 
sons and  events,  the  story  moving  like  some  drama  on  to 
its  tragic  end. 

Whether  we  wish  it  or  not,  the  present  and  the  future 
must  be  filled  with  great  problems  arising  from  this  era, 
to  be  understood  only  in  connection  with  it.  Into  con- 
sideration of  these  problems  we  here  in  the  United  States 
are  destined  to  be  ever  more  nearly  drawn. 

Much  of  the  writing  was  done  in  connection  with  the 
author's  Europe,  1789-1920;  but  considerable  additions 
have  been  made  and  some  portions  are  entirely  new. 
If,  in  spite  of  the  larger  space  available  here,  he  can  be 
reproached  with  having  left  out  a  great  many  things,  the 
answer  must  be  that  he  has  tried  very  hard  to  do  this.  In 
his  own  studies  and  reading  he  has  never  had  any  lasting 
impression  from  a  mere  collection  of  details.     He  has. 


viii  PREFACE 

tlierefore,  striven  to  eliminate  non-essential  things  wher- 
ever he  could,  and  elsewhere  subordinate  the  less  im- 
portant matters  to  consideration  of  principal  tendencies 
and  dominant  ideas.  It  is  his  highest  ambition  that  in  his 
pages  ma 3'  be  had  a  glimpse  of  the  reality  of  departed  years 
and  something  of  the  spirit  that  was  in  them.  In  respect 
of  this  he  hopes  that  some  of  the  quotations  at  the  chapter 
heads  may  seem  of  more  worth  than  ten  times  their  space 
filled  with  data  and  statistics;  and  that  here  and  there  a 
student  reading  them  may  feel  the  mysterious  call  to  seek 
out  the  great  books  himself. 

The  author  is  indebted  to  the  courtesy  of  Messrs.  G.  P. 
Putnam's  Sons  for  permission  to  quote  at  the  beginning 
of  the  seventeenth  chapter  lines  written  by  the  late 
Lieutenant-Colonel  John  McCrae. 

Edward  Raymond  Turner. 
Ann  Arbor,  Michigan 
May  1,  1921 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

I.     The  Era  of  1870 7 

II.    The  French  Revolution  and  After  17 

III.  New   Inventions   and   the   Industrial 

Revolution 40 

IV.  Certain     Intellectual     and     Social 

Changes 67 

V.     The  European  States  in  1870      ...  94 
VI.     The  Military  Triumphs  of  Germany, 

1864-1871 122 

VII.    The  Growth  of  the  New  German  Em- 
pire         143 

VIII.     The     Leadership     of     Germany — The 

Triple  Alliance 173 

IX.    The  Recovery  of  France — The  Dual 

Alliance 210 

X.     Democratic  Britain 240 

XI.     Russia 269 

XII.    Austria-Hungary,    Turkey,    and    the 

Balkans 304 

XIII.  Italy,  Spain,  and  the  Lesser  States     .  344 

XIV.  Colonies  and  Imperial  Expansion  .      .  369 
XV.     Triple  Alliance  and  the  Ententes       .  398 

XVI.     The  Causes  of  the  Great  War  .      .      .421 

XVII.     The  Great  War 450 

XVIII.     The  Settlement  of  1920 498 

XIX.     Socialism,       Syndicalism,       and       the 

Russian  Revolution       .....  529 

Appendix 551 

Index 557 

ix 


ERRATUM 
On  Map  No.  5,  following  Page  100,  for  GERMAN 
EMPIRE  read:     GERMANY    (NORTH  GERMAN 
CONFEDERATION      AND      SOUTH     GERMAN 
STATES). 


MAPS 

NO.  PAOB 

1.  Relief  Map  of  Europe       .      .      .  Following  20 

2.  Racial  Map  of  Europe  ....          "  36 

3.  The  Coal,   Iron,   and  Oil  Resources  of 

Europe Vullowimj  51 

4.  Europe:    Showing  Railroads,  Canals,  and 

Principal  Rivers Following  08 

5.  Europe  in  1870  {In  colors)       .      .          "  100 
G.     Alsace-Lorraine 140 

7.  The  German  Empire  in  1914    .      .  Following  1G4 

8.  The  Treaty  of  San  Stefano 177 

9.  France  in  1920 216 

10.  The  British  Isles 244 

11.  Ireland:    Showing  the  Sinn  Fein  Areas  in 

1918,  and  the  Unionist  Areas  in  Ulster.  262 

12.  Map  to  Illustrate  the  History  of  Poland  275 

13.  Racial  Map  of  Russia 277 

14.  The  Russian  Empire  in  1914    .      .  Following  292 

15.  The  Russo-Japanese  War 295 

16.  RACLA.L  Map  of  Austria-Hungary      .      .      .  309 

17.  The  Balkans  in  1878 .322 

18.  The  Ottoman  Dominions:     Greatest  Ex- 

tent,   Successive    Losses,    Present   Ex- 
tent   Following  324 

19.  The  Balkans  in  1913 330 

20.  Asia  in  1800 Following  356 

21.  Africa  in  1800 "  372 

22.  Asia  in  1914 "  388 

23.  Africa  in  1914 "  404 

zi 


xii  MAPS 

NO.  PAGE 

24.  The  British  Empire  in  1914     .      .  Following  420 

25.  Supposed  Pan-German  Plan    .      .  "  436 

26.  The  Western  Front  in  the  Great  War      .  465 

27.  The  Eastern  Front  in  the  Great  War.      .  466 

28.  The   Oceans   of   the   World — Mercator's 

Projection:    Showing  the  Principal  Sea 
Lines  of  Communication  in  the  Great 

War Following  468 

29.  Gallipoli 471 

30.  The  Austro-Italian  Frontier 483 

31.  Africa  in  1920 Following  500 

32.  Czecho-Slovakia 507 

33.  The  Balkans  in  1920 509 

34.  Jugo-Slavia 510 

35.  The  British  Empire  in  1920     .      .  Following  516 

36.  Europe  in  1920  {In  colors)   ...  "  532 


EUROPE   SINCE   1870 


INTRODUCTORY 
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL  NOTE 

For  additional  general  readinf!,  especially  for  the  perifxl  before  1870: 
C.  M.  Andrews,  The  Historical  Development  of  Modern  Europe  from  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  to  the  Present  Time,  2  vols.  (1^2^);  Oscar  Brown- 
ing, History  of  the  Modern  World,  1815-1010,  2  vols.  (1912);  Antonin 
Debidour,  Histoire  Diplomatique  de  V Europe,  1811^-1878,  2  vols.  (1891); 
E.  Driault  and  G.  Monod,  Evolution  du  Monde  Moderne:  Histoire  Poli- 
tique et  Sociale,  1815-1009  (1910);  C.  A.  Fyffe,  A  History  of  Modern 
Europe,  1702-1878  (189G);  C.  J.  H.  Hayes,  A  Political  and  Social  His- 
tory of  Modem  Europe,  1500-1015,  2  vols.  (191(5-17);  C.  D.  Hazen, 
Europe  Since  1815  (1910);  W.  A.  Phillips,  Modern  Europe,  1815-1800 
(2d  ed.,  1902);  J.  S.  Schapiro,  Modern  and  Contemporary  European  His- 
tory (1918);  C.  Seignobos,  A  Political  History  of  Europe  Since  1814 
(trans,  by  S.  M.  Macvane,  1900) ;  also,  J.  H.  Robinson  and  C.  A.  Beard, 
Readings  in  Modern  European  History  (1909). 

Of  longer  works  Alfred  Stern,  Geschichte  Europas  scit  den  Vertrdgen 
von  1815  his  zum  Frankfurter  Friedcn  von  1871,  exhaustive  and  based 
largely  on  sources,  is  the  best;  volumes  I-VII  (1894-1910),  covering 
the  years  down  to  1852,  have  appeared. 

For  the  period  after  1870:  F.  M.  Anderson  and  A.  S.  Hershey, 
Handbook  for  the  Diplomatic  History  of  Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  1870— 
ion  (1918),  a  cooperative  work  which  contains  excellent  summaries 
and  up-to-date  bibliographical  lists;  C.  M.  Andrews,  Contemporary 
Europe,  Asia,  and  Africa,  1871-1001  (1902);  A.  Debidour,  Histoire 
Diplomatique  de  i Europe  depuis  le  Congres  de  Berlin  jusqua  Nos  Jours, 
2  vols.  (191G),  the  best  account  of  recent  French  diplomatic  history; 
W.  M.  Fullerton,  Problems  of  Power:  a  Study  of  International  Politics 
from  Sadoiva  to  Kirk-Kilisse  (1913);  H.  A.  Gibbons,  The  New  Map  of 
Europe  (1914);  L.  H.  Holt  and  A.  W.  Chilton,  The  History  of  Europe 
from  18G2  to  1014  (1917);  J.  H.  Rose,  The  Development  of  the  European 
Nations,  1870-1014,  2  vols,  in  one  (5th  ed.,  1916);  Charles  Seymour, 
The  Diplomatic  Background  of  the  War,  1870-1014  (1916). 

More  comprehensive  are  the  great  cooperative  histories:  The 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  ed.  by  A.  W.  Ward,  G.  W.  Prothero,  S. 
Leathes,  14  vols.  (1902-12),  of  which  the  volumes  are  bulky  and  the 
contents  seldom  inspiring,  but  which  are  always  instructive,  and  in 
which  the  student  who  cares  to  turn  to  them  will  find  a  vast  amount  of 
additional  information  about  most  of  the  important  topics  treated  in  this 
volume;  Histoire  Genhale  du  IV  Siecle  a  Nos  Jours,  ed.  by  E.  Lavisse 

3 


4  BIBLIOGRAPHICAL    NOTE 

and  A.  Rambaud,  1'2  vols.  (1894-1901),  less  up-to-date  but  more  attrac- 
tive; Allgcmcine  Gcschichte  in  Einzeldarstclhmgen,  ed.  by  W.  Oncken, 
50  vols.  (1879-93).  For  information  about  historical  writing,  Eduard 
Fueter,  Gcschichte  der  Ncueren  Histcn-iographie  (1911);  G.  P.  Gooch, 
History  and  Historians  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1913). 

For  the  treaties:  P.  Albin,  Les  Grands  TraitSs  Politiques:  Recueil 
des  Principaux  Textes  Diplomatiques  dcpuis  1815  jusqu'd  Nos  Jours 
(ed.  1911);  Sir  Edward  Hertslet,  The  Map  of  Europe  by  Treaty,  18U- 
1891,  4  vols.  (1875-91);  Baron  Descamps  and  L.  Renault,  Recueil 
des  Traites  du  XIX'  Siecle  (1914-). 

Notwithstanding  that  a  great  part  of  the  most  important  diplomatic 
papers  remain  unpublished  and  inaccessible  in  the  various  archives  of 
Europe,  yet  a  large  number  have  been  published,  and  may  be  used 
in  such  storehouses  of  information  as  Archives  Diplomatiques,  129 
vols.  (1863-1914),  covermg  the  period  1862  to  1913;  and  British 
and  Foreign  State  Papers,  108  vols.  (1841-1918),  covering  the  years 
1812  to  1914. 

For  information  about  governments :  W.  F.  Dodd,  Modern  Constitu- 
tions, 2  vols.  (1909);  F.  A.  Ogg,  TJie  Governments  of  Europe  (1913); 
Percy  Ashley,  Local  and  Central  Government:  a  Comparative  Study  of 
England,  France,  Prussia,  and  the  United  States  (1906);  Handbuch  des 
Offentlichen  Rechts  der  Gegenwart  in  Monographien  (ed.  by  Heinrich 
Marquardsen  and  others,  1883-);  W.  B.  Munro,  The  Government 
of  European  Cities  (1909). 

For  the  miscellaneous  things,  about  which  ready  information  is 
often  got  with  much  difficulty,  the  best  source  is  the  Encyclopcedia 
Britannica,  11th  ed.,  29  vols.  (1910-11),  in  which  not  a  few  of  the 
articles  are  contributions  by  the  best  authorities. 

For  additional  biographical  information:  the  Dictionary  of  National 
Biography,  72  vols.  (1885-1913);  Nouvelle  Biographie  Generale,  46  vols. 
(1855-66);  Allgemeine  Deutsche  Biographie,  54  vols.  (1875-). 

If  possible,  students  should  sometimes  consult  the  principal  historical 
reviews,  where  they  will  not  only  find  much  rare  and  interesting  infor- 
mation but  be  brought  into  contact  with  the  best  modern  scholarship 
and  research:  Tlie  American  Historical  Review;  The  English  Historical 
Review;  Historische  Zeitschrift;  La  Revue  Historique;  La  Revue  des 
Questions Historiques;  and,  for  the  more  elementary  student.  The  History 
Teacher's  Magazine,  now  The  Historical  Outlook. 

No  text  book  ever  contained  too  many  maps,  and  the  student  will 
find  it  well  to  use  an  atlas  as  much  as  possible:  E.  W.  Dow,  Atlas  of 
European  History  (1907);  Ra.msay  Muir,  Hammond's  New  Historical 
Atlas  for  Students  (2d  ed.  1915);  W-R-Qhepherd,  Historical  Atlas  {1911); 
Cambridge  Modern  History,  vol  XIV;  and  H.  B.  George,  The  Relations 
of  Geography  and  History  (1910). 

For  military  affairs:  General  A.  von  Horsetzky,  A  Short  History  of  the 
Chief  Campaigns  in  Europe  Since  1792  (trans,  by  Lieut.  K.  B.  Ferguson^ 
1909). 


BIBLIOGRAPHICAL    NOTE  5 

International  law:  L.  F.  W.  Oppenheim,  International  Law,  2  vols, 
(1905-G);  H.  J.  F.  X.  Bonfils,  Manuel  du  Droit  International  Public 
{Droit  des  Gens),  7th  ed.  (1914). 

For  current  information  the  following  annual  publications:  The 
Annual  Register  (1758-);  VAnnee  Politique  (1874-1905),  continued  as 
La  Vie  Politique  dans  les  Deux  Mondes  (190G-);  Europdischer  Geschickts- 
kalender  (18(51-);  The  Statesman  s  Year  Book  (1864-);  The  New  In- 
ternational Year  Book  (1907-). 

The  student  with  a  taste  for  recent  history  will  find  a  fascinating 
field  for  exploration  in  the  volumes  of  the  more  important  periodicals, 
such  as  The  (London)  Nation,  The  National  Review,  The  Quarterly 
Renew,  The  (New  York)  Weekli/  Revieiv,  Revue  des  Deux  Mondes,  and 
many  others.  He  will  also  find  much  instruction  and  amusement  in 
the  cartoons  of  such  publications  as  Jugend  and  Punch. 


CHAPTER   T 
THE   ERA   OF    1870   AND   EUROPE 

Europe  is  the  smallest  in  extent  of  the  four  great  continents,  and  yet 
we  may  pronounce  it  the  most  important  of  all  the  divisions  of  the 
globe.  Asia,  indeed,  was  the  cradle  of  civilization  and  knowledge; 
but  her  emi)ires  soon  became,  and  have  ever  since  continued, 
stationary;  while  Europe  has  carried  the  sciences,  arts,  and  re- 
finements, with  almost  uninterrupted  progress,  to  the  compara- 
tively elevated  state  at  which  they  have  now  arrived.  All  the 
branches  of  industry  are  conducted  with  a  skill  and  to  an  extent 
unattained  in  any  other  part  of  the  earth. 

Hugh  Murray,  and  others,   The  Encyclopaedia  of  Geography 
(1855),  i.  288,  289. 

The  beginning  of  this  period  of  European  history,  far 
away  as  it  seems  now,  is  not  remote  tlirough  number  of 
years.  Some  can  still  remember  1870,  and  many  fathers  and 
mothers  of  the  generation  now  living  were  of  the  genera- 
tion then  in  its  prime.  But  passing  years  have  brought 
about  mighty  changes.  The  men  of  that  time,  so  be- 
wliiskered,  as  they  peer  from  out  of  tlie  engravings,  with 
tall  hats,  loose  trousers,  long  coats;  the  women,  with  wide 
skirts,  crinoline,  and  shawls;  the  artisans,  the  laborers, 
the  women  workers,  the  peasants,  seen  in  the  prints  or 
cruder  pictures  of  then;  all  of  these  people  of  the  era  of  our 
fathers  or  grandfathers  lived  amidst  changes  which  have 
since  made  their  life  and  surroundings  appear  strange  and 
old-fashioned  to  us. 

Yet,  compared  with  what  had  been  a  century  previous, 
before  1789,  in  the  Old  Regime,  these  men  and  women 
lived  in  the  midst  of  conditions  much  like  our  own.  A 
hundred  years  before,  in  the  eighteenth  century,  almost  all 
the  people  in  Europe  had  made  their  living  by  working  the 

7 


Two  genera- 
tions ago 


The  Old 
Regime  very 
different 
from  the 
period  about 
1870 


8 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Lowly  con- 
dition of  the 
people  in  the 
eighteenth 
century 


Religion 


land.  A  much  smaller  number  sought  their  livelihood  in 
manufacturing,  commerce,  and  trade.  They  worked  long 
hours  with  simple  tools,  and  with  much  labor  of  muscle 
and  hands.  Few  of  them  could  read  and  write.  Most 
of  them  made  up  a  lower  class,  without  political  power 
or  rights,  ruled  by  a  small  upper  class  and  sovereigns, 
whom  they  obeyed  and  supported.  The  great  mass  of  men 
and  women  were  serfs,  partly  unfree.  Between  the  throng 
of  laborers,  peasants,  and  serfs  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
great  men  of  the  nobility  or  the  Church  on  the  other,  was 
a  middle  class,  the  bourgeoisie,  rising  in  importance,  but 
in  most  countries  still  with  small  part  in  controlling  affairs. 
Generally  government  was  in  the  hands  of  sovereigns, 
who  had  power  complete  and  despotic,  ruling  of  them- 
selves and  through  officials  whom  they  appointed  or  re- 
moved at  their  pleasure.  In  no  great  country  then  did  an 
important  representative  assembly  exist,  save  in  Great 
Britain;  and  the  British  parliament,  though  it  was  repre- 
sentative and  endowed  with  real  power,  represented  only 
the  upper  classes  and  very  often  worked  in  their  interests. 
Nowhere,  except  among  the  followers  of  such  men  as 
Rousseau,  was  there  any  idea  that  all  men,  not  to  speak 
of  women,  should  vote  and  be  represented  in  parliaments, 
which  should  make  the  laws  and  grant  taxes.  There  was 
much  unbelief  and  religious  decadence,  but  this  had  been 
confined  mostly  to  the  upper  intellectual  class.  The 
great  body  of  the  people  everywhere  followed  the  teaching 
of  their  priests  without  question.  Enlightened  sceptics 
might  deride  the  dogmas  of  the  Church,  but  the  masses, 
simple  and  pious,  accepted  the  Scriptures,  with  the  story 
of  creation  and  the  fall  of  man,  with  the  derivative  con- 
ceptions of  heaven,  earth,  purgatory,  and  hell,  literally, 
with  no  reservation.  In  most  of  the  countries  of  Europe 
national  feeling  was  dormant  or  weak. 

At  this  time  most  people  travelled  seldom  and  little. 
By  land  they  must  go  on  foot,  on  horseback,  or  in  cumber- 


THE    ERA    OF    1870    AND    EUROPE     9 


some  coaches,  over  poor  roads,  ill  made  and  ill  kept.  On 
the  rivers  they  might  go  down  with  the  current  toward 
the  coast.  On  the  sea  they  would  voyage  slowly  in  small 
sailing  ships  driven  forward  by  the  wind.  Not  many 
letters  could  be  sent;  lliey  went  slow  and  might  not  be 
delivj|^d.'|^&B|Espapcrs  were  few  and  small  and  contained 
little  nfews.  ^here  was  no  way  of  getting  news  from  other 
places  quickly.  Most  houses  were  not  well  heated,  and 
there  was  no  way  for  most  people  to  get  enough  inex- 
pensive fuel.  Artificial  lighting  was  scanty  and  poor; 
and  after  sundown  there  was  such  darkness  as  is  not 
known  to  most  people  now.  There  was  not  much  ma- 
chinery. Manufacturing  was  mostly  carried  on  in  the 
laborers'  homes.  The  work  was  done  largely  by  hand, 
with  simple  tools  and  devices.  The  steam  engine  was 
only  just  beginning  to  be  used.  There  w^ere  not  yet  any 
railroads,  no  steamboats,  no  telegraphs,  no  telephones, 
and  no  electrical  apparatus.  Only  a  little  had  the  forces 
of  nature  been  reduced  to  the  service  of  man. 

By  1870  an  immense  transformation  had  come.  Divine 
right  of  kings  and  their  absolute  power  had  been  over- 
thrown in  western  Europe  In  many  countries  constitu- 
tions had  appeared,  and  governments  had  come  to  be 
limited  and  responsible  to  representatives  elected.  Most 
people  still  did  not  accept  any  idea  of  complete  democracy 
or  universal  suffrage,  and  would  have  laughed  to  scorn  the 
suggestion  that  women  should  have  any  control  over  the 
governments  which  ruled  them.  None  the  less  the  con- 
dition of  women  was  slowly  but  constantly  improving,  and 
in  one  country  after  another  the  electorate  was  being 
widened  and  democracy  enhanced  and  extended.  By 
this  time  nationalism  had  come  to  be  one  of  the  strongest 
political  forces  in  the  world.  In  western  Europe  the  power 
of  nobles  and  great  churchmen  had  been  broken,  and  an 
aristocracy  of  blood  no  longer  lorded  over  the  mass  of  the 
people.     The  place  of  the  old  nobility  now  was  largely 


Material 
conditions 
in    the    time 
of  the  Old 
R6gime 


Conditions 
about  1870 


10 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Industry 
and  capi- 
talism 


Material 
conditions  in 
1870 


held  by  an  industrial  aristocracy,  the  great  manufacturers, 
capitalists,  and  traders,  much  increased  in  numbers,  in 
wealth,  and  in  power.  They  were  masters  of  men  em- 
ployed in  factories  and  working  at  the  machines  of  em- 
ployers for  wages.  More  and  more  they  dominated  the 
conduct  of  affairs.  But  the  workers,  so  helpless  and 
oppressed  in  the  early  days  of  the  Industrial  Revolution, 
were  slowly  gathering  power  to  win  better  conditions. 
Already  they  were  beginning  to  form  industrial  trade 
unions,  while  the  socialist  doctrines  of  St.  Simon  and  Marx 
proclaimed  new  hopes  for  the  masses  of  mankind.  At 
the  same  time,  immense  and  brilliant  scientific  investiga- 
tion was  establishing  new  ideas  which  conflicted  with  the 
older  teachings  of  the  Church.  Men  were  beginning  to 
believe  that  the  world  was  very  old,  and  that  things  al- 
ways had  developed  by  slow  change  or  evolution. 

During  the  period  just  preceding,  the  advance  in  dis- 
covery and  mechanical  invention  had  been  far  greater 
than  in  any  epoch  before.  In  1870,  it  is  true,  in  Europe 
as  elsewhere,  there  were  no  airplanes,  no  submarines,  no 
automobiles,  no  combustion  gas  engines,  and  no  tram  cars 
in  the  cities.  The  phonograph,  the  cinema,  and  wireless 
telegraphy  had  not  yet  appeared.  But  some  of  the  great- 
est things  which  we  have  now  men  were  possessed  of  then. 
The  immense  liners  and  huge  freight  ships  which  cross 
every  ocean  in  our  day  had  not  yet  appeared,  but  steam- 
ships had  revolutionized  sea-borne  traffic.  The  passage 
over  the  Atlantic,  which  had  formerly  taken  a  month  or 
six  or  seven  weeks,  now  sometimes  took  less  than  a  fort- 
night. Maritime  facilities  were  being  extended,  and 
vast  changes  and  improvements  made.  The  Isthmus  of 
Panama  was  still  the  narrow  but  insuperable  obstacle  be- 
tween the  Atlantic  and  the  Pacific  that  it  was  in  the  days 
when  Balboa  toiled  slowly  from  one  shore  to  the  other. 
But  a  still  greater  obstacle  to  the  world's  trade  had  just. 
been  removed.     In  1869  the  Suez  Canal  was  opened  amidst' 


THE    ERA    OF    1870    AND    EUROPE     11 


ma^ificent  festivities,  memorable  for  the  first  perform- 
ance of  Verdi's  Aula.  Tlie  splendid  railroad  systems  of 
Europe,  which  before  the  Great  War  linked  all  its  im- 
portant cities  together,  and  formed  a  network  of  high- 
ways in  the  more  advanced  countries  of  the  west,  were  far 
less  developed  fifty  years  before;  but  railways  had  long 
been  increasingly  important.  Already  the  Prussians  were 
arranging  their  railways  for  war,  in  "strategic  systems." 

Partly  in  consequence  of  better  transportation,  partly 
because  of  certain  great  mechanical  inventions,  an  in- 
dustrial system  had  been  rising,  which  made  it  easy 
to  produce  more  necessaries  and  luxuries  than  had  ever 
been  possible  before  in  the  history  of  mankind.  The 
telegraph  was  everywhere  bringing  rapid  communication 
on  land,  while  telegraphs  carried  in  submarine  cables  were 
being  laid  beneath  various  seas.  In  1866  such  a  cable  had 
been  stretched  across  the  bottom  of  the  Atlantic.  It  was 
now  possible  for  news  to  be  got  quickly  from  a  distance, 
and  with  the  development  of  the  power  printing-press, 
large  newspapers  containing  much  fresh  news  were  cir- 
culated widely  without  delay.  Illiteracy  was  still  preva- 
lent in  eastern  and  southern  Europe,  and  much  of  it 
remained  in  all  countries  except  Prussia  and  a  few  smaller 
states.  Yet,  it  had  much  diminished  since  the  beginning 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  there  were  constantly  more 
readers  of  newspapers,  periodicals,  and  books. 

The  lands  of  these  people,  the  mountains,  the  rivers, 
the  seas  round  about — all  were  very  much  as  they  had  been 
for  a  hundred  past  generations.  In  mass  and  in  area 
Europe  seemed  small  enough,  for  it  was  least  among  the 
continents,  less  than  either  of  the  Americas,  only  an 
extension  of  Asia,  to  the  east,  and  small  beside  the  giant 
Africa  southward.  From  Asia  Europe  was  marked  off 
on  the  east  by  the  low-lying  Ural  Mountains;  southward 
by  the  Caspian  Sea  and  the  Black  Sea,  and  by  the  Cau- 
casus  Mountains  between   them.     At   two    points,   the 


Machinery 
and  com- 
munication 


The  Con- 
tinent of 
Europe 


12  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Bosporus  and  the  Dardanelles,  where  Constantinople 
stood  and  where  ancient  Troy  once  had  been,  Asia  and 
Europe  were  separated  by  less  than  the  breadth  of  a  river. 
Between  Europe  and  Africa  lay  the  Mediterranean,  high- 
way of  commerce  and  once  the  very  cradle  of  European 
culture.  Past  the  sunlit  shores  of  Greece  and  Italy 
and  France,  this  sea  stretched  on  resplendent  and  broad, 
until  narrowing  down  by  the  Spanish  coast  it  ended  at  the 
Strait  of  Gibraltar. 
The  Euro-  Of  this  Europe  the  greater  part  was  a  vast  and  exten- 

pean  plain  sive  low  plain,  which  embraced  all  the  eastern  half  of  the 
continent.  From  the  sunken  stretches  by  the  Caspian 
and  the  great  wheat  lands  above  the  Black  Sea,  up  across 
the  steppes,  the  forests,  the  marshes  of  Russia,  to  the 
barren  tundras  of  the  north,  and  eastward  from  the  Urals 
to  the  Carpathian  Mountains,  stretched  the  mighty  ex- 
panses of  this  plain,  which  was  here  the  home  of  the 
Russian  people  and  mother  of  the  races  of  the  Slavs. 
Huge,  monotonous,  unbroken,  it  was  traversed  by  broad, 
slowly  moving  rivers,  Ural,  Volga,  Dnieper,  and  Don, 
flowing  to  the  south,  and  by  others  less  known  and  less 
used  flowing  northward.  Stretching  west,  to  the  north 
of  the  Carpathians  and  lesser  mountains,  a  narrower  part 
of  this  plain  extended,  across  the  Prussian  and  northern 
German  lands,  over  Belgium  and  Holland,  across  the  north- 
ern part  of  France  and  the  western  part,  down  to  the 
Pyrenees  Mountains.  And  farther  north  and  westward, 
beyond  the  Baltic  Sea  and  the  North  Sea,  beyond  lands 
long  since  sunken  and  drowned,  portions  of  this  plain 
ended  in  Sweden  and  England.  Across  parts  of  this 
western  extension  ran  the  most  renowned  rivers  of  Europe, 
Vistula,  Oder,  Elbe,  Weser,  Rhine,  Seine,  Loire,  Garonne, 
and  Thames.  In  this  great  plain,  from  the  Russian 
mountains  to  the  Bay  of  Biscay  and  Ireland,  lived  most 
of  Europe's  inhabitants,  and  there  now  were  assembled 
most  of  her  wealth  and  grandeur  and  power. 


THE    ERA    OF    1870    AND    EUROPE     13 

Elsewhere  mountain  and  upland  held  sway  over  low-  Mountain 
land  and  plain.  Most  of  Norway,  most  of  Switzerland,  '^^  "P^*°^ 
all  the  north  half  of  Scotland,  most  of  Wales,  and  much 
of  the  Balkan  country,  were  mountainous,  and  parts  of 
them  backward,  sparsely  peopled,  and  poor.  Between 
Italians,  Germans,  and  Frenchmen  the  heights  of  the 
Alps  rose  like  a  towering  rampart,  distinctly  separating 
nations.  All  the  eastern  coast  of  the  Adriatic  and  all  the 
west  side  of  Norway  were  a  succession  of  deep  jSords  and 
landlocked  bays  between  lofty  and  precipitous  mountains. 
In  1870  the  inhabitants  of  Albania  were  in  the  midst  of 
the  savage,  tribal  conditions  in  which  Lord  Byron  had 
known  them  sixty  years  earlier,  like  the  Scottish  High- 
landers two  centuries  before.  Spain,  with  plateau  lands 
traversed  by  parallel  ranges,  was  definitely  marked  off 
from  France  by  the  Pyrenees  Mountains.  In  central 
Europe  the  Carpathians  lay  like  a  bulwark  reared  against 
Russia. 

The  principal  arteries  of  communication  and  commerce  Rivers  and 
continued  to  be  the  rivers  and  the  seas.  The  more  im-  seas 
portant  rivers  of  north  Russia  and  those  of  eastern  Ger- 
many drained  to  the  Baltic,  whence  the  commerce  of 
these  regions  went  outward  in  between  the  Scandinavian 
countries  to  the  North  Sea  and  the  oceans  of  the  world. 
The  rivers  of  west  Germany,  the  Low  Countries,  and  north 
France,  flowed  to  the  North  Sea  and  the  English  Channel, 
whence  their  commerce  was  carried  to  the  Atlantic.  Be- 
yond the  Continent  lay  England,  just  where  she  com- 
manded all  of  this  commerce.  Her  favorable  position  had 
brought  her  great  wealth  and  power.  To  London,  on 
the  estuary  of  the  Thames,  came  the  shipping  of  the  world, 
while  Liverpool,  on  the  western  side  of  England,  throve  on 
the  growing  American  trade.  Eastern  Russia  drained 
down  to  the  land-locked  Caspian  through  the  mighty 
length  of  the  Volga.  All  central  and  southern  Russia 
looked  toward  the  Black  Sea,  while  Austria,  Hungary,  and 


14 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  land 
routes 


Memorials, 

traditions, 

associations 


the  Balkan  countries  were  nourished  by  the  Danube 
which  sought  this  sea  also.  The  commerce  of  the  Black 
Sea  went  in  a  steady  stream  past  Constantinople  and 
Gallipoli  to  the  Mediterranean,  where  it  was  mostly  borne 
westward  past  southern  Europe  out  by  Gibraltar  to  the 
Atlantic  Ocean.  On  the  Mediterranean,  brought  thither 
by  road  or  river,  went  the  commerce  of  Greece,  of  Italy, 
of  southern  France,  and  of  most  of  Spain. 

The  great  land  routes  sought  the  valleys  and  the  plains, 
or,  if  necessary,  climbed  uplands  and  the  mountain 
passes.  Through  the  Pyrenees  went  the  overland  routes 
between  France  and  Spain.  Through  the  several  Alpine 
passes  armies  and  merchants  had  gone  from  the  time  of 
Hannibal  to  the  time  of  Napoleon,  and  under  the  Alps  long 
tunnels  for  railways  were  soon  to  be  built.  Between  the 
French  and  the  German  peoples,  between  Paris  and 
Berlin,  the  old  roads,  the  modern  trunk  line,  the  principal 
highway,  traversed  the  plain  across  Belgium  and  Holland, 
and  across  these  small  countries,  especially  Belgium,  from 
one  to  the  other  of  the  mightier  neighbors,  merchants  and 
their  wares  had  gone  for  ages,  and  armies  had  often  met 
there  in  mortal  combat. 

This  Europe  was  a  land  very  rich  in  its  past,  enshrined 
in  old  deeds  and  traditions.  Some  ancient  crosses  and 
round  towers  still  existed  in  Ireland.  Up  and  down  Eng- 
land, from  Canterbury  to  Durham,  were  the  cathedrals, 
with  their  majesty,  beauty,  and  repose.  In  Portugal 
were  the  vast,  deserted  palaces  built  in  former  times. 
In  Spain  the  Escurial  watched  over  its  gray,  wide 
plain,  while  the  sublime  quietude  of  the  cathedral  at 
Toledo  witnessed  the  devotion  of  days  elsewhere  gone. 
All  through  the  southern  parts  of  France  were  relics  of 
Greeks,  of  Romans,  of  medieval  culture,  from  the  aque- 
duct near  Nimes  and  the  amphitheatre  at  Aries  to  the 
fortress  towers  and  the  keep  of  Carcassonne.  Northward 
v.ere  the  cathedrals,  at  Bourges,  at  Chartres,  at  Amiens, 


THE    ERA    OF    1870    AND    EUROPE     15 

at  Rheims,  and  Noire-Dcime  de  Paris;  and  farther  on  tlic  Cities  of 
abbeys  and  churches  of  the  Normans.  In  Belgium  tlie  ^^^^^^^ 
Cloth  Hall  at  Ypres,  the  towers  and  old  bridges  of  Bruges. 
,  At  Cologne  the  cathedral  spires  threw  their  shadows  down 
by  the  Rhine.  All  across  western  Germany,  along  the 
Baltic,  down  through  Austria  and  its  provinces,  were 
memorials  of  an  older  German  culture,  at  Augsburg,  at 
Niirnberg,  at  Innsbruck,  at  Salzburg,  at  Rotlienburg,  and 
Aachen.  In  Italy  were  the  palaces  and  churclies  of  Milan 
and  Florence,  the  canals  and  the  marbles  of  Venice,  the 
tombs  of  Ravenna,  the  tower  of  Pisa,  the  Coliseum  at 
Rome  and  St.  Peter's,  and  near  Naples  the  older  ruins  of 
Pompeii  were  even  then  being  uncovered.  By  the  Danube 
at  Vienna  stood  the  houses  of  the  proudest  aristocracy  in 
Europe.  At  Constantinople  bulked,  as  if  for  ever,  the 
dome  of  Sania  ISophia;  before  it  rose  in  slender  height  the 
newer  minarets  of  the  Turk.  Across  the  stretches  of  the 
Russian  plain  were  Moscow  and  Novgorod,  in  their  as- 
pect half  oriental;  and  farther  still,  at  Samara  on  the 
Volga,  the  market  place,  with  riot  of  colors  and  babel 
of  voices,  its  throngs  come  from  Europe  and  Asia. 

The  mountains  of  southern  Spain  had  looked  down  when     The  past 
the  Moors  gjiined  their   victories   and   afterward    made     ^^^  ^^® 

Dr6S6Ilt 

their  last  stand.  The  Pillars  of  Hercules  had  watched 
the  Phoenician  galleys  go  by.  The  fogs  and  the  rain  blew 
in  Ireland  as  in  the  time  of  Saint  Patrick.  The  Channel 
and  the  Rhine  had  long  before  been  observed  and  described 
by  Caesar.  Older  by  far  than  the  Catacombs  of  Rome 
or  the  ruined  temple  at  Paestum,  Vesuvius  poured  forth 
its  smoke,  while  Stromboli  glared  in  the  night  as  when 
Carthaginians  came  sailing  north.  The  Alpine  passes 
had  seen  the  ages  go  by,  with  the  barbarians,  the  con- 
querors, the  merchants,  the  pilgrims,  who  had  toiled  to 
their  heights,  then  gone  downward.  INIore  ancient  than 
Homer  or  Sappho  was  the  beauty  of  the  isles  of  tlie  Greeks. 
A  few  years  before  the  Carpathians  had   been  pierced 


16  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Europe  an        by  Russian  armies,  as  long  since  they  had  been  traversed 

ancient  ^    Hungarians  and  Huns.     The  endless  reaches  of  Russia 

home  of  i      i  •  mi        -r»i  • 

peoples  stretched   on   m   remoteness   and   sadness.     The    Rhme 

flowed  dowTi,  past  medieval  castles  and  new  industrial 
cities,  by  ancient  vineyards,  by  the  memories  of  Roman 
bridges.  The  stars  of  the  night,  which  had  glittered  for 
Galileo  and  Dante,  watched  now  the  nineteenth  century 
slowly  draw  toward  its  close.  Beside  these  things  the  state- 
craft of  rulers,  wars,  treaties,  arrangements,  the  toil  and  the 
lives  of  people,  man's  doings  and  man's  aspirations,  here 
as  elsewhere  seemed  fleeting,  small,  unimportant. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

For  a  general,  brief  summary  of  European  life  and  conditions: 
E.  R.  Turner,  Europe,  1789-1920  (1920). 

The  accounts  of  travellers  often  contain  vivid  description 
and  a  great  deal  of  interesting  information:  Edmondo  De 
Amicis,  UOlanda  (1874,  trans.  1880),  Ricordi  di  Londra  (1874); 
W.  C.  Bryant,  Letters  of  a  Traveller  (1850);  Charles  Dickens, 
Pictures  from  Italy  (1844);  R.  W.  Emerson,  English  Traits 
(1856);  Theophile  Gautier,  Voyage  en  Espagne  (1843,  trans. 
1853),  Italia  (1852),  Voyage  en  Russie  (1866);  A.  J.  C.  Hare, 
Walks  in  Rome  (1871);  Nathaniel  Hawthorne,  Our  Old  Home 
(1863),  English  Note  Books  (1870),  French  and  Italian  Note 
Books  (1871);  John  Hay,  Castilian  Days  (1871);  Victor  Hugo, 
Le  Rhin  (1842);  H.  W.  Longfellow,  Outre-Mer  (1835);  H.  B. 
Stowe,  Sunny  Memories  of  Foreign  Lands,  2  vols.  (1854) ;  Hippo- 
lyte  Taine,  Voyage  aux  Pyrenees  (1855),  Voyage  en  Italic  (1866, 
trans.  1869),  Notes  sur  V Angleterre  (1872);  Bayard  Taylor, 
Views  Afoot  (1846),  Travels  in  Greece  andRussia  (1859), Northern 
Travel  (1860);  W.  M.  Thackeray,  The  Paris  Sketch  Book  (1868), 
The  Irish  Sketch  Book  (1869);  C.  D.  Warner,  In  the  Levant 
(1875);  Edward  Whymper,  Scrambles  among  the  Alps  (1871); 
N.  P.  Willis,  Pencillings  by  the  Way  (1835). 


CHAPTER  II 

THE   FRENCH  REVOLUTION  AND 
AFTER 


The  i)ower  of  kings  and  magistrates  is  nothing  else,  but  what  is  only 
derivative,  transferred  and  (committed  to  them  in  trust  from  the 
people  to  the  common  good  of  them  all,  in  whom  the  power  yet  re- 
mains fundamentally. 
John  Milton,  The  Tenure  of  Kings  and  Magistrates  (1649). 

Les  representants  du  people  fran^ais  eonstitues  en  assemblee  nation- 
ale     .     .     .     declarent 
Les  hommes  naissent  et  demeurent  libres  et  egaux  en  droits.     .     .     . 
Le  but  de  toute  association  politique  est  la  conservation  des  droits 
naturels     ...     la  liberte,  la  propriete,  la  sflretc  et  la  resistance  a 
I'oppression 

Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man,  September  14,  1791,  Archives 
Parlementaires,  1st  series,  xxxii.  525. 

Universal  suffrage  fera  le  tour  du  monde.     It  is  now  the  last  court  of 
appeal  on  all  questions,  international,  among  the  rest. 

Conversation  of  Montalembert  with  Nassau  Senior  (1863). 

Down  to  1870,  perhaps  it  still  seemed  that  the  most 
important  cause  of  changes  in  the  hundred  years  preceding 
had  been  the  French  Revolution,  and  that  Europe  in  the 
nineteenth  century  had  been  adjusting  herself  to  what 
had  begun  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  in 
France.  In  the  days  of  the  Old  Regime  the  great  mass  of 
men  and  women  almost  everywhere  had  been  debased, 
ignorant,  laborious  peasants,  toiUng  on  the  land  to  produce 
with  a  rude  agriculture  the  subsistence  for  themselves 
and  their  masters.  For  the  most  part,  as  in  Russia,  the 
German  countries,  Hungary,  and  Poland,  they  were  serfs, 
partly  unfree,  bound  to  the  soil,  under  obligation  to  work 
for  their  lord  several  days  in  the  week,  and  make  to  him 

17 


Europe  be- 
fore the 
French 
Revolution 


18 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Condition 
of  the 


Ideas  about 
government 


payments  in  produce  or  kind.  In  some  places,  like  Ire- 
land, where  serfdom  did  not  prevail,  the  peasants  were 
bowed  down  in  as  lowly  position  through  heavy  rents 
which  they  paid  to  landlords.  Nowhere,  save  in  some  of 
tlie  Swiss  Cantons,  did  the  mass  of  the  people  control 
their  governments  or  have  any  voice  in  the  conduct  of 
affairs.  Almost  everywhere  they  were  excluded  from  all 
participation  in  government,  substantially  debarred  from 
the  holding  of  office,  not  allowed  to  vote  for  the  members 
of  legislative  or  conciliar  assemblies,  where  such  assemblies 
existed.  Most  of  them  were  entirely  subject  to  the  rule 
of  absolute  sovereigns  or  powerful  nobles.  The  mighty 
Roman  Catholic  Church  had  for  ages  insisted  that  within 
its  ranks  there  should  be  opportunity  for  the  humblest  to 
rise,  though  actually  the  great  places  had  almost  always 
been  monopolized  by  members  of  the  upper  classes.  In 
the  seventeenth  century  Calvinists,  asserting  that  all  men 
were  equal  in  the  sight  of  God,  transferred  this  idea  to  the 
realm  of  politics,  and  declared  that  church  members,  at 
any  rate,  should  have  part  in  the  government  under  which 
they  Hved,  and  some  right  to  control  their  rulers.  Gen- 
erally, however,  there  was  no  idea  that  most  men  and 
women  should  have  any  part  in  the  governance  of  states, 
through  representatives  consenting  to  taxes  or  making  the 
laws  of  the  land.  It  was  almost  universally  held  that 
they  should  merely  obey  without  question.  Kings  and 
nobles  then  tried  to  govern  their  realms  to  best  advantage, 
and  sometimes  endeavored  to  better  the  condition  of  the 
people.  None  the  less,  for  the  most  part  government  was 
managed  in  the  interests  of  the  sovereigns  and  the  upper 
classes,  taxes  were  imposed  without  respect  to  the  wish  of 
the  payers,  and  statecraft  and  foreign  policy  were  carried 
on  at  the  discretion  of  rulers. 

In  Great  Britain  then  conditions,  though  very  different 
from  what  they  are  now,  were  nevertheless  better  than 
anywhere  else  in  Europe.     The  power  of  the  king  had  long 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


19 


been  limited  by  a  parliament  composed  partly  of  represent- 
atives of  the  upper  and  middle  classes,  and  it  was  not 
possible  to  take  from  British  subjects  a  shilling  of  taxes 
which  their  parliament  had  not  freely  granted.  Serfdom 
had  completely  passed  away.  The  great  majority  of  the 
people  had,  indeed,  no  voice  in  the  government,  but  they 
had  the  protection  of  the  English  common  law  and  certain 
great  statutes,  like  Habeas  Corpus;  and  the  great  men  of 
the  upper  classes,  while  ruling  in  their  own  interests,  yet 
had  much  consideration  for  the  people  beneath  them. 
The  government  of  Britain  in  the  latter  part  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century  was  regarded  as  a  model  by  the  great 
French  political  theorists  and  writers,  who  hoped  that 
their  own  might  be  reconstructed  some  day  so  as  to  be 
more  like  it. 

In  France  conditions  then  were  less  good,  but  more 
favorable  than  in  any  other  large  state  excepting  Great 
Britain.  The  government  was  entirely  in  the  hands  of  a 
king  with  unlimited  power,  assisted  by  officials  whom  he 
appointed.  ^\Tiereas  parliamentary  institutions  had  de- 
veloped in  England,  so  that  in  course  of  time  the  power 
of  the  king  was  limited  and  checked,  in  France  they  had 
declined,  and  the  French  representative  assembly,  the 
Etats  Generaux,  had  not  been  summoned  since  1G14. 
Serfdom  had  mostly  disappeared,  but  some  old  manorial 
obligations,  payments  to  the  seigneur  and  working  upon 
his  land,  remained  to  vex  a  great  number  of  peasants. 
Taxes  were  high,  and  were  paid  very  largely  by  the  im- 
poverished lower  classes.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  most 
Frenchmen  probably  realized  that  for  tlie  past  hundred 
years  their  government  had  been  more  successful  than 
that  of  any  other  great  state  on  the  Continent,  that  the 
soil  of  France  had  almost  never  in  that  time  been  trodden 
by  invaders,  that  France  was  great  and  respected,  and 
that  French  culture,  in  its  favorable  surroundings,  had 
developed  more  finely  than  any  other  then  in  existence. 


Conditions 
in  Great 
Britain 


In  France 


20 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Conditions 

relatively 

good 


First  stage 
of  the 
French 
Revolution, 
1789-1792 


It  was  partly  because  conditions  were  relatively  good,  and 
because  civilization  and  prosperity  were  high,  that  so 
much  enlightened  discontent  was  developed.  Writers 
like  Montesquieu  and  Voltaire  proclaimed  the  superior 
excellence  of  English  institutions;  Voltaire  and  Diderot 
criticized  traditional  beliefs  with  remarkable  clearness  and 
merciless  wit;  Rousseau  and  his  disciples  spread  abroad 
a  strange  new  philosophy  that  men  were  equal,  that  they 
should  control  their  government,  that  existing  things 
should  be  overthrown  so  that  men  might  return  to  a 
blessed  "state  of  nature."  These  teachings  were  allowed 
by  a  society  long  established  and  now  grown  careless, 
so  strongly  established,  as  it  seemed,  that  it  need  not  fear 
for  the  future.  But  year  by  year,  in  the  second  half  of 
the  eighteenth  century,  the  bourgeoisie  were  rising  in 
importance  and  less  content  with  their  status,  national 
finances  grew  more  hopelessly  involved,  and  the  condition 
of  the  lowest  class  seemed  harder  to  bear.  At  last  bank- 
ruptcy was  at  hand,  and  as  a  final  recourse  the  king,  Louis 
XVI,  summoned  the  Etats  Generaux,  the  old  assembly  of 
estates. 

Few,  perhaps,  expected  the  mighty  results  which 
followed.  Almost  immediately,  the  Third  Estate,  rep- 
resentatives of  the  middle  and  lower  classes,  got  control 
of  the  body.  They  proclaimed  themselves  a  National 
Assembly,  and  proceeded  to  draw  up  a  constitution  for 
France.  The  ideas  long  spread  about  were  now  seen  to 
have  taken  deep  root,  and  there  was  abundant  evidence 
that  reform  would  at  once  be  attempted.  Presently,  in 
1791,  a  constitution  was  proclaimed  which  made  France  a 
limited  monarchy,  like  Great  Britain,  with  principal  power 
in  a  legislative  assembly;  but  going  beyond  what  had  yet 
been  accomplished  in  England,  the  franchise  was  given  to 
three  fourths  of  the  men  of  the  state.  Nowhere  up  to 
that  time  had  so  great  an  extension  of  the  electorate  been 
made.     The  National  Assembly  had  abolished  serfdom  and 


>* 


\P  OF  EUROPE 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION        21 


manorial  burdens,  and  tiien  confisc'aic(l  the  vast  posses- 
sions of  the  Churcli,  a  fifth  of  the  hind  in  tlie  kingdom. 
Hunger  and  misery  had  already  caused  outbreaks  of  the 
poor  and  the  desperate,  who  rose  up  against  their  lords, 
seized  their  property,  and  drove  them  away. 

In  the  course  of  the  two  years,  1789-91,  the  French 
reformers  seemed  to  have  accomplished  all  that  had  been 
brought  to  pass  in  Britain  during  ages,  and  more.  But 
the  momentum  of  so  rapid  a  change  is  seldom  to  be 
stayed  until  it  has  gone  much  farther  in  more  rapid  and 
violent  course.  Radicals  now  demanded  more  funda- 
mental and  thorough-going  reforms,  declaring  that  what 
had  been  done  so  far  benefited  the  lower  classes  very 
little.  Ideas  of  complete  democracy  were  put  forward, 
and  other  ideas  like  the  socialism  preached  fifty  years 
later.  Amid  discontent  from  existing  abuses  and  the 
confusion  attending  reforms  it  was  not  difficult  for 
resolute  radicals  to  seize  control  of  affairs,  especially 
when  reactionaries  and  foreign  powers  tried  to  restore 
what  had  just  been  abolished.  Accordingly,  in  1792,  the 
Revolution  entered  upon  a  new  and  more  radical  phase, 
when  the  new  constitutional  government  was  overthrown, 
a  repubUc  proclaimed,  and  a  National  Convention,  chosen 
by  manhood  suffrage,  assembled  to  draw  up  another 
constitution.  Next  year  the  king  was  put  to  death,  and 
the  nobles  banished  for  ever.  Sweeping  changes  were  made 
or  begun  in  the  interests  of  the  mass  of  the  people.  The 
property  of  the  nobles  was  confiscated  by  the  state  and 
sold;  and  presently  bought  by  small  proprietors,  so  that 
afterward  France  came  to  be  more  largely  divided  among 
small  owners  than  any  other  great  state  in  the  world. 
Simplification  and  codifying  of  the  law  were  begun,  and  a 
better  educational  system  was  planned,  work  completed 
afterward  under  Napoleon  Bonaparte.  But  this  excellent 
work  was  wrought  in  the  midst  of  a  period  of  excessively 
radical  change.   Some  of  tlie  reformers  tried  to  sweep  away 


The  second 
stage, 1792-5 


The  Con- 
vention 


22 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Reign 
of    Terror 
and  the  en- 
suing   reac- 
tion 


The  middle 
class 
assumes 
control 


all  old  things.  They  called  1792  the  Year  I.  Some  wished 
to  divide  all  property  among  all  of  the  people.  Christianity 
was  suppressed  and  the  worship  of  Reason  proclaimed. 

There  was,  consequently,  inevitable  reaction.  Many 
Frenchmen  loved  the  old  order.  They  had  not  sought 
its  overthrow,  and  longed  to  restore  it.  A  great  many 
earnestly  wanted  the  reforms  made  by  the  National  As- 
sembly, but  not  the  extremer  changes  offered  now  by  the 
Convention.  Moreover,  the  measures  against  church 
property,  and  especially  against  the  Church,  profoundly 
alienated  great  bodies  of  men  and  women  whose  strongest 
attachment  was  to  their  Church.  And  finally,  while 
the  great  mass  of  the  people  had  formerly  been  peasants, 
poor  and  discontented,  now  that  manorial  obligations  had 
been  abolished,  their  condition  was  bettered.  As  they 
began  to  purchase  the  confiscated  lands  and  become 
property-owners  themselves,  they  became  conservative 
and  no  longer  willing  to  follow  radical  leaders.  Ac- 
cordingly, while  in  1792-3  a  great  outburst  of  patriotism 
and  rising  of  the  people  enabled  the  Convention  to  repel 
foreign  enemies  who  tried  to  enter  France,  soon  the  leaders 
in  the  Convention,  like  Marat,  Danton,  and  Robespierre, 
could  maintain  their  power  only  through  a  reign  of  Terror, 
as  did  the  Bolsheviki  in  Russia  more  than  a  century  later. 
By  massacre,  by  judicial  murder,  by  ruthless  force,  they 
suppressed  all  uprisings  and  got  space  to  continue  their 
work.  But  the  tide  now  flowed  steadily  back  away  from 
them,  and  presently  the  Convention  came  again  under 
the  power  of  the  bourgeoisie.  In  1795  the  so-called  Con- 
stitution of  the  Year  III  established  the  Directory,  and 
made  the  government  a  middle-class  republic,  in  which  the 
franchise  was  limited  by  property  qualifications.  When 
this  government  had  lost  esteem  from  inefficiency  and  from 
corruption  it  was  overthrown  by  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  a 
soldier  of  fortune  but  also  a  statesman  and  genius  of  un- 
rivalled abilities  and  daring. 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


23 


Bonap«irte,  in  effect,  saved  from  furtli(T  reaelion  and, 
perhaps,  from  overthrow,  such  of  the  work  of  the  Revohi- 
tion  as  had  soHd  basis  in  the  wishes  of  most  of  the  people. 
As  first  consul,  under  the  Constitution  of  the  Year  VIII 
(1800),  and  afterward  as  emperor  (1802-1814),  he 
seized  upon  all  real  power  in  the  state,  and  was  actually 
more  powerful  than  Louis  XVI  ever  had  been.  But 
the  work  of  the  National  Assembly,  1789-91,  was  pre- 
served, and  some  of  the  work  of  the  Convention  brouglit 
to  completion.  Thus  under  Napoleon,  as  under  the 
Constitution  of  1791,  serfdom  and  manorial  obligations 
remained  abolished;  and  the  land  taken  from  the  mon- 
asteries and  the  Church,  and  now  getting  more  and  more 
into  the  possession  of  peasant  proprietors,  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  a  new,  stronger  France.  Under  his  direction  the 
old  confused  laws  were  reduced  to  the  simple  Code  Na- 
poleon, which  embodied,  moreover,  some  of  the  best  ideas 
of  the  Revolution.  A  great  reform  of  education  was 
carried  forward.  On  the  other  hand,  the  excesses  of  the 
Jacobins  and  the  Terror  were  rejected;  and  peace  was 
made  with  the  Church  in  the  compromise  embodied  in  the 
Concordat  of  1801.  Accordingly,  the  all-important,  but 
comparatively  moderate,  reforms  of  the  first  part  of  the 
Rev^olution  were  preserved. 

From  France  the  reforms  of  the  Revolution  were  spread 
out  over  western,  southern,  and  central  Europe  during 
a  long  series  of  wars,  which  began  during  the  Revolution, 
continued  under  Napoleon,  and  were  finally  ended  with 
the  Battle  of  Waterloo  in  1815.  In  1792  the  Revolution- 
ists had  seen  themselves  threatened  not  only  by  con- 
servatives and  reactionaries  in  France,  but  by  opposition 
from  all  the  old  divine  right  monarchies  of  Europe. 
Taking  the  offensive  themselves  they  soon  proclaimed  that 
they  would  carry  the  blessings  of  their  revolution  to  all 
the  oppressed  peoples  of  Europe.  Then  bj^  propaganda 
and  force  of  arms  they  sought  to  set  up  their  system  in 


The  less 
radical  part 
of  the  Revo- 
lution saved 
by  Napoleon 
Bonaparte 


The  Revolu- 
tionary ideas 
spread  to 
other  coun- 
tries 


24 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Radicals 
and  con- 
servatives 
in  Europe 


Reaction 
1814-1855 


all  of  the  lands  near  by.  They  had  much  success,  and  soon 
occupied  the  districts  adjoining  their  frontiers.  Presently, 
indeed,  Europe  was  divided  between  the  innovators,  sup- 
ported and  urged  forward  by  a  militant  French  Republic, 
and  all  those  who  clung  to  the  old  order,  whose  instincts 
were  conservative,  who  were  appalled  at  the  execution  of 
the  French  king  and  his  queen,  and  at  the  excesses  of  the 
Reign  of  Terror.  Napoleon  was,  indeed,  ambitious  and 
filled  with  consciousness  of  his  ability  as  a  soldier,  but 
he  was  also  confronted  with  an  opposition  in  Europe, 
which  was  to  a  large  extent  opposition  to  the  French 
Revolution.  In  the  long  wars  of  his  time,  which  lasted 
witli  little  intermission  from  1797  to  1815,  he  crushed  his 
enemies,  and  erected  the  mightiest  despotism  and  military 
empire  which  Europe  had  seen  for  ages,  but  he  also  de- 
fended and  preserved  the  better  parts  of  the  Revolution. 
When  at  last  his  enemies  finally  prevailed  and  his  power 
was  broken,  through  mere  passage  of  time  the  best  reforms 
of  the  Revolution  had  got  firm  root  in  France,  and  in  the 
neighboring  countries  where  Frenchmen  had  brought 
them. 

With  the  restoration  of  the  Bourbons  in  1814  a  period 
of  reaction  began  in  France,  but  the  best  reforms  were  not 
disturbed,  and  presently  the  work  of  1789  was  extended 
by  the  Revolution  of  1830.  After  the  downfall  of  Na- 
poleon very  naturally  reaction  at  once  commenced  in  all 
the  principal  countries  of  Europe.  After  the  long  period 
of  wars  and  confusion  one  of  the  principal  objects  of  the 
great  men  who  assembled  at  the  Congress  of  Vienna  (1814- 
15)  was  to  restore  what  had  been  overthrown  and  make 
further  revolution  impossible.  During  the  period  of  the 
domination  of  Metternich,  the  Austrian  statesman 
(1814-48),  and  of  Tsar  Nicholas  I  of  Russia  (1825-55), 
reaction  held  full  sway  over  parts  of  the  Continent.  But 
even  so,  none  of  the  great  things  which  had  been  achieved 
in  1789  was  destroyed.     The  Revolution  of  1830  began 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION        25 


a  new,  more  liberal  era  in  Franee  and  in  Belgium;  wliile 
the  revolutions  in  various  countries  in  1S48  not  only 
carried  forward  the  work  in  France  but  broke  the  power 
and  the  system  of  Metternich  in  central  Europe.  As  yet 
the  spirit  of  the  French  Revolution  had  scarcely  crossed 
the  borders  of  the  realm  of  the  tsars,  but  after  the  dis- 
asters of  the  Crimean  War  (1854-6),  a  new  era  began  also 
in  Russia.  During  all  this  time  and  afterward  the  ideas 
proclaimed  in  France  in  1789  were  being  spread  farther 
and  farther,  and  more  and  more  made  good  and  accepted. 

In  1789  serfdom  had  been  the  condition  of  most  of  the 
people  of  Europe.  In  that  year  the  remnants  of  it  were 
abolished  in  France.  During  the  Revolutionary  and 
Napoleonic  periods  it  was  brought  to  an  end  by  French 
conquerors  in  the  German  lands  along  the  Rhine,  in  Italy, 
and  in  Spain.  In  1807,  when  Prussia,  striving  to  regene- 
rate herself  and  then  escape  from  Napoleon's  overlord- 
ship,  was  carrying  through  great  reforms,  serfdom  was 
abolished  in  her  dominions.  It  was  now  at  an  end  in 
western  and  southern  Europe,  and  in  most  of  the  German 
countries;  but  it  lingered  on  among  the  millions  of  subjects 
of  Austria  and  Russia.  Then,  during  the  Revolution  of 
1848  serfdom  was  abolished  in  Austria  and  in  Hungary. 
Meanwhile,  there  had  been  some  idea  of  freeing  the  serfs 
in  Russia;  but  this  was  not  attempted  in  earnest  until  the 
reign  of  Alexander  II,  who  brought  it  to  an  end  in  the  years 
from  1859-66.  By  this  time  slavery,  a  more  complete 
form  of  ser\'itude,  had  been  abolished  in  the  Southern 
States  of  the  American  Union,  so  that  by  1870,  except  in 
Brazil,  civil  freedom  was  universal  in  every  country 
ruled  by  white  men  in  the  world. 

Meanwhile,  constitutional  progress  had  gone  on  apace. 
In  1789  no  important  country  had  a  constitution  defining 
the  powers  of  the  government,  except  the  new  United 
States  with  their  written  constitution  just  established,  and 
Great  Britain  with  the  custom,  laws,  and  court  decisions. 


Later 

revolutions, 
1830,  1848 


Disappear- 
ance of 
serfdom 


Constitu- 
tional prog- 
ress 


26 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Constitu- 
tional 

government 
in  France 


In  Spain 


which  practically  made  an  unwritten  constitution.  Almost 
everywhere,  in  states  great  or  little,  the  power  of  the 
sovereign  was  not  limited,  save  to  some  exient  by  general 
custom  and  obvious  propriety.  Generally  that  which 
pleased  the  prince  was  law. 

In  1791  the  French  National  Assembly  drew  up  the  first 
constitution  ever  given  to  a  great  state  on  the  continent 
of  Europe,  and  this  was  followed  by  others,  in  1795  and 
1800,  all  of  them  defining  exactly  the  functions  of  the 
government  and  limiting  its  power.  There  was  now  in 
France  above  the  rulers  a  great  law  which  they  must 
observe;  and  while  in  effect  such  a  thing  had  long  existed 
in  England,  there  it  was  unwritten  and  defined  only  by  the 
custom  and  constitutional  development  of  the  English 
people.  \ATien  Louis  XVIII  was  restored  in  1814  he 
granted  a  Charter,  or  constitution,  which,  although  it 
embodied  the  doctrine  of  Divine  Right,  limited  the  author- 
ity of  the  king  and  provided  a  definite  scheme  for  the 
government  of  the  realm.  In  1830  this  Charter  was 
revised,  and  the  doctrine  of  Divine  Right  omitted.  After 
the  Revolution  of  1848  a  constituent  assembly  drafted 
a  new  arrangement,  and  although  Louis  Napoleon 
seized  large  power  for  himself,  yet  even  when  he  reigned 
as  the  Emperor  Napoleon  III  he  ruled  the  country  under 
a  constitution. 

Meanwhile,  constitutionalism  had  gone  forward  in 
countries  near  by.  The  people  of  Great  Britain  continued, 
in  accordance  with  their  peculiar  and  admirable  political 
genius,  to  preserve  their  constitution  large  and  unwritten; 
but  as  changes  took  place  in  other  countries  constitutions 
were  written  out  explicitly  after  the  manner  of  the  French 
and  the  American  peoples.  In  1812  the  Spanish  revolu- 
tionists had  proclaimed  a  liberal  constitution,  embodying 
the  best  ideas  recently  developed  in  France,  and  though 
this  constitution  was  speedily  overthrown,  it  was  pro- 
claimed again  in  Spain   during   the   revolution  there  in 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION        27 

1820,  and  for  some  time  served  as  a  model  for  liberals  In  central 
in  the  southern  lands.  In  1830,  when  the  Belgians  de-  Europe 
clarcd  their  independence  of  Holland,  they  adopted  a 
constitution,  for  some  time  the  most  liberal  in  Europe. 
The  Revolution  of  1848  brought  constitutions  in  Austria 
and  in  Hungary,  though  in  the  following  reaction  they 
were  speedily  overthrown.  In  the  next  year,  however, 
a  new  constitution  was  proclaimed  for  all  of  the  Austrian 
dominions.  Meanwhile,  a  general  assembly,  knowTi  as 
the  Frankfort  Parliament,  had  convened  to  draw  up  a 
scheme  for  uniting  Germany.  This  assembly  tried  also 
to  make  a  liberal  constitution,  but  in  the  reaction  soon 
under  way  in  central  Europe  the  rulers  of  the  principal 
states  found  it  easy  to  reject  its  work.  In  Prussia  in  1848 
the  people  had  risen  in  revolution,  and  a  constituent 
assembly  was  called.  The  king  was  soon  able  to  dismiss 
the  members;  but  in  1850  a  constitution  was  granted  by 
the  grace  of  the  sovereign  himself.  Forty  years  before 
the  Prussian  king  had  promised  to  grant  a  "suitably 
organized  representation  both  provincial  and  national," 
but  this  promise,  twice  repeated  at  intervals  of  five  years, 
had  remained  unfulfilled.  WTien  at  last,  in  1867,  Ger- 
man unity  was  substantially  accomplished,  the  new  North 
German  Confederation  was  organized  under  a  constitution, 
which  was  the  basis  of  that  of  the  German  Empire  estab- 
lished soon  after.  \Mien  the  age-long  troubles  of  the 
Austrians  and  Magyars  were  arranged  in  1867,  the  settle- 
ment was  embodied  in  the  constitutional  Compromise  or 
Ausgleich.  Farther  east  and  south,  in  the  dominions  of 
Russia  and  of  Turkey,  there  continued  to  be  no  semblance, 
of  government  by  any  constitution. 

Meanwhile,  the  other  great  ideas  of  the  French  Revo-     Liberty  and 
lution  were  spreading  through  Europe  and  changing  the     equality 
relations  of  men.     Liberie,   Egalite,  Fratcrnite  were  the 
magnificent  watchwords  of  Revolutionary  leaders,   and 
far  as  the  deeds  of  these  men  and  their  successors  often  fell 


28 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Impulse  of 
the  French 
Revolution 


Democracy 
in  earlier 
times 


short,  yet  it  was  the  ideal  of  the  best  men  to  bring  them 
to  pass.  Liberty  and  equaHty  were  more  and  more  made 
good  by  the  work  of  the  Revolution  and  Napoleon,  and  as 
the  result  of  a  spirit  increasingly  enlightened  and  humane. 
Rousseau's  idea,  that  man  was  born  free,  was  embodied 
in  the  French  Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man 
(1791),  that  all  men  are  free  and  equal  in  rights.  As 
serfdom  was  abolished  and  civil  equality  made  good  in 
France,  and  as  these  reforms  were  gradually  extended 
beyond  the  French  borders,  a  great  amelioration  in  the 
condition  of  the  masses  took  place.  By  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century  these  things  had  been  wrought  in 
France;  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  they  were 
accomplished  in  central  Europe;  during  the  second  half 
they  were  being  worked  out  in  the  eastern  part. 

But  while  the  idea  of  civil  equality  was  spreading  across 
Europe,  political  equality  made  much  slower  progress. 
Nowhere  except  among  a  few  radical  reformers  was  it 
believed  that  all  of  the  people  or  most  of  them  should  have 
part  in  the  government  of  the  state.  "I  do  not  know," 
said  Bishop  Horsley  in  the  British  House  of  Lords,  "what 
the  mass  of  the  people  in  any  country  have  to  do  with  the 
laws  but  to  obey  them."  Democracy  and  political  equal- 
ity had  scarcely  yet  been  conceived  of.  In  ancient  times 
there  had  been  in  the  most  highly  developed  communi- 
ties, especially  in  some  of  the  city  states  of  Greece,  flour- 
ishing democracies,  in  which  political  power  was  actually 
in  the  hands  of  the  demos  or  people.  But  this  demos 
was  only  a  part  of  the  community,  the  free  male  citizens 
of  the  state,  living  beside  other  men  who  had  no  share  in 
political  privileges  and  supported  by  a  far  more  numerous 
body  of  slaves.  In  the  seventeenth  century  the  Calvin- 
istic  religious  doctrines  applied  to  politics  presently  devel- 
oped the  idea  of  the  political  equality  of  the  citizens  in  the 
government  of  their  country,  and  for  a  while  in  England 
(1649-60)  monarchy  was  abolished,  a  republic  established. 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


29 


and  political  power  given  to  the  citizens  of  tlie  state. 
But  neitlier  in  England,  where  tlie  experiment  endured 
only  for  a  brief  space,  nor  in  Calvinist  Geneva  and  the 
Puritan  communities  across  the  Atlantic  in  New  England, 
where  the  idea  endured,  was  there  any  complete  notion  of 
democracy,  for  always  the  franchise  was  rigidly  restricted 
to  "God-fearing"  men,  the  members  of  the  Church  in 
power.  Furthermore,  the  Greek  democratic  assemblies 
of  all  the  citizens,  making  their  laws  and  deciding  upon 
the  administration  of  government,  could  never  operate 
successfully  for  a  large  area.  Hence  self-government 
could  not  be  developed  by  the  people  in  a  widely  extended 
jurisdiction  like  the  Roman  Empire. 

During  the  Middle  Ages,  in  Europe  an  immense  forward 
step  was  taken  in  the  gradual  development  of  representa- 
tive government,  in  wliich  a  few  went  from  a  locality  to 
stand  for  their  many  fellows  w^ho  could  not  go.  Usually 
the  representatives  were  wanted  merely  to  grant  money 
to  the  king,  but  in  course  of  time  they  gained  greater 
power,  and  attended  to  other  things  also.  Tliis  was  the 
origin  of  the  medieval  estates  of  the  realm.  In  England, 
where  they  had  their  farthest  development,  they  grad- 
ually made  the  parliament  of  England.  But  generally 
the  idea  was  not  that  people,  or  all  people,  should  be  rep- 
resented, and  hence  should  choose  the  representatives 
who  went  to  the  assembly  for  them,  but  that  the  members 
should  represent  property  or  classes  of  people.  As  late  as 
1793  a  British  judge  gravely  declared:  "A  government 
in  every  country  should  be  just  like  a  corporation;  and  in 
this  country  it  is  made  up  of  the  landed  interest,  whicli 
alone  has  a  right  to  be  represented;  as  for  the  rabble  who 
have  nothing  but  personal  property,  what  hold  has  the 
nation  upon  them.''" 

During  the  Age  of  Reason  and  while  old  ideas  were 
breaking  up  in  the  second  half  of  the  eigliteenth  century, 
a  new,  bold  conception  came  forth.     Rousseau,  developing 


Develop- 
ment of  the 
system  of 
representa- 
tion 


Representa- 
tion of  peo- 
ple 


30 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Rousseau 


Representa- 
tion of  all 
the  people 


ideas  once  put  forward  by  others  who  attracted  little  at- 
tention, now  proclaimed  that  according  to  nature  all  men 
were  equal,  and  that  the  wickedness  of  man  and  the 
misfortunes  of  time  had  made  the  inequalities  existing. 
His  ideas  concerning  this  "state  of  nature,"  to  which  he 
urged  all  men  to  return,  had  no  historical  foundation,  and 
probably  no  basis  in  fact,  but  through  the  wondrous 
eloquence  and  passion  of  his  writing  he  got  universal  at- 
tention. The  American  Declaration  of  Independence  in 
1776  specifically  embodied  this  doctrine,  and  it  was  pres- 
ently asserted  for  a  greater  number  of  people  in  the 
French  Constitution  of  1791.  But  actually  it  was  diffi- 
cult to  realize.  In  the  American  communities  there  was 
no  thought  whatever  of  including  negro  slaves  or  even  free 
negroes;  and  when  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
was  adopted  the  regulation  of  the  franchise  was  left  to 
the  several  states,  in  which  for  a  while  only  a  small  minor- 
ity of  the  people  might  vote.  Great  Britain  had  long 
had  the  most  liberal  government  in  Europe,  but  the 
franchise  for  electing  members  of  the  House  of  Commons 
had  been  fixed  long  before,  and  not  one  man  out  of  ten  had 
the  suffrage.  The  new  French  constitution  immensely 
extended  the  franchise — to  three  fourths  of  all  the  men; 
but  this  franchise  was  based  upon  property,  being  re- 
stricted to  those  who  paid  a  certain  amount  of  taxes. 

During  the  confusion  of  1792  Rousseau's  conception  of 
equality  was  partly  realized  in  politics,  when  a  National 
Assembly  was  chosen  by  manhood  suffrage.  Among  cer- 
tain English  radicals  also  the  doctrine  was  already  growing. 
"Personality  is  the  sole  foundation  of  the  right  of  being 
represented,"  said  John  Cartwright  in  his  pamphlet 
Take  Your  Choice  (1776),  "property  has,  in  reality,  noth- 
ing to  do  in  the  case."  And  he  and  others  advocated 
extension  of  the  suffrage  to  all  men.  But  actually  such 
ideas  were  contrary  to  a  vast  amount  of  prejudice  and 
olden  custom,  and  in  days  when  communication  was  poor, 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION        31 

with  no  wide  circulation  of  newspapers,  no  ra[)i(l  dis- 
semination of  news,  and  when  most  people  could  not  read, 
they  could  probably  not  have  succeeded.  In  Britain  the 
agitation  made  no  headway;  in  France  reaction  soon  came. 
In  the  French  Constitution  of  the  Year  III  (1795)  the 
franchise  was  again  restricted  by  property  qualifications, 
and  while  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Year  VIII  (1800) 
manhood  suffrage  was  for  the  first  time  really  established, 
these  voters  were  merely  to  choose  others  who  would  then 
choose  five  thousand  "National  Notables"  from  whom 
the  executive  would  choose  the  members  of  the  legislative 
assembly,  so  that  the  power  of  the  ballot  was  not  really 
entrusted  to  the  people. 

Even  after  the  Restoration  and  the  Congress  of  Vienna 
there  was  gradual  and  continued  political  progress,  and 
the  franchise  was  slowly  extended.  In  France  the  Charter 
restricted  the  franchise  to  men  of  thirty  years  or  more  with 
high  property  qualification,  thus  allowing  the  vote  to 
100,000  voters  out  of  a  population  of  29,000,000.  In 
1831  an  electoral  law  reduced  the  qualification  and  so 
increased  the  electorate  to  200,000  out  of  32,000,000. 
After  the  Revolution  of  1848  a  new  constitution  again 
established  manhood  suffrage. 

In  the  British  Isles  progress  seemed  slower,  but  more 
was  really  being  achieved.  Religious  disabilities  w^ere 
first  removed  from  Protestant  Dissenters  and  from  Roman 
Catholics,  and  then  after  a  memorable  agitation  the 
franchise  was  extended  in  1832.  By  no  means  was  the 
principle  of  manhood  or  universal  suffrage  admitted. 
"The  higher  and  middling  orders  are  the  natural  repre- 
sentatives of  the  human  race,"  Macaulay  had  said  three 
years  before;  and  the  suffrage  was  still  restricted  to  cer- 
tain classes,  and  limited  by  property  qualifications.  In- 
deed, the  principal  effect  of  a  change  which  seemed  revolu- 
tionary then  was  to  transfer  control  from  the  upper  class 
to  the  middle  class,  probably  more  conservative  and  more 


Extension  of 
the  fran- 
chise in 
France 


In  the 
United 
Kingdom 


32 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


In  the  North 
German 
Confedera- 
tion 


In  other 
countries 


tenacious  of  its  rights.  None  the  less,  the  electorate 
was  increased  from  500,000  to  1,000,000.  A  generation 
later,  in  1867,  after  much  unrest  and  repeated  demands, 
a  second  electoral  reform  law  was  passed,  and  the  fran- 
chise, still  limited  by  particular  qualifications,  was  extended 
so  that  2,500,000  men  could  vote  out  of  a  population  of 
about  30,000,000.  This  seemed  but  a  grudging  conces- 
sion in  comparison  with  the  manhood  suffrage  established 
in  France  since  1848,  and  the  manhood  suffrage  granted 
by  the  constitution  of  the  North  German  Confederation 
(1867);  but  in  the  France  of  the  Second  Empire,  as  in  the 
Norddeutsches  Bund  of  Bismarck,  and  in  the  German 
Empire  afterward  established,  choosing  of  the  members 
of  the  national  legislature  was  of  less  importance  because 
other  constitutional  provisions  left  to  these  legislatures 
little  substantial  power.  In  the  United  Kingdom,  on 
the  other  hand,  while  only  a  portion  of  the  men  might 
vote  for  their  representatives  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
yet  the  Commons  really  controlled  the  government. 

In  other  countries  where  constitutional  government 
was  erected  the  franchise  was  usually  restricted  by  prop- 
erty qualifications.  By  the  constitution  of  1831  only  those 
Belgians  might  vote  who  paid  a  considerable  tax;  and  the 
electorate  was  but  slightly  extended  in  1848.  In  Holland, 
where,  as  in  England,  there  had  long  before  been  relatively 
large  constitutional  progress,  the  electorate  was  small 
and  was  only  slightly  extended  in  1848.  In  Spain  uni- 
versal suffrage  had  been  prematurely  established  in  1812, 
but  the  constitution  was  overthrown,  reestablished  by  a 
revolution,  then  abrogated  again.  In  1848  Piedmont  re- 
ceived from  her  king  a  constitution  according  to  which 
the  electorate  was  restricted  to  property-holders,  and  on 
the  establishment  of  Italian  unity  (1861)  this  constitution 
with  some  changes  was  given  to  the  Kingdom  of  Italy. 
During  the  Revolution  of  1848  universal  manhood  suf- 
frage was  proclaimed  in  Austria.     In  Hungary,  the  same 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


33 


year,  by  the  March  Laws  the  antiquated  Diet,  formerly 
controlled  entirely  by  tlie  nobility,  was  so  reformed  that  its 
members  were  to  be  elected  by  citizens  owning  a  certain 
amount  of  property.  The  reaction  which  soon  followed 
swx^pt  all  this  away,  and  for  a  while  after  1851  the  Haps- 
burg  dominions,  like  the  Russian,  were  ruled  entirely  ac- 
cording to  the  will  of  the  sovereign.  In  18G7,  when  the 
Ausgleich  was  agreed  on,  a  narrow  electorate  was  estab- 
lished in  the  two  parts  of  the  Dual  Monarchy.  Switzer- 
land in  earlier  times  had  been  one  of  the  principal  strong- 
holds of  constitutional,  even  democratic,  government  in 
the  world.  In  1848,  when  the  Swiss  Republic  was  estab- 
lished, a  constitution  was  adopted  by  which  the  members 
of  the  National  Council,  the  lower  house  of  the  national 
legislature,  were  to  be  elected  by  the  votes  of  all  adult 
males.  In  1814  a  constitution  was  established  in  Norway 
by  which  the  representatives  in  the  national  legislature 
were  elected  by  a  large  electorate  limited  by  low  property 
qualifications.  In  Sweden  and  also  in  Denmark  the 
process  was  very  much  slower. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  while  in  the  American  colo- 
nies, as  in  England  during  the  same  period,  the  franchise 
had  been  restricted  to  a  small  number  of  the  inhabitants 
by  various  qualifications,  and  that  this  restriction  con- 
tinued for  some  time  after  independence  had  been  won, 
the  limitations  were  removed  in  the  early  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  by  1830,  substantially,  there  was 
manhood  suffrage  for  the  free,  white,  adult  males  of  the 
United  States. 

Fraternity,  perhaps  the  noblest  idea  of  the  Revolution, 
an  old  ideal  of  the  Christian  Church,  proclaimed  by  the 
gentlest  and  wisest  souls  for  a  thousand  years,  was  realized 
much  less  well.  True,  it  was  carried  forward  by  the  en- 
lightenment and  humanitarianism  increasingly  character- 
istic of  the  nineteenth  century,  by  the  great  body  of  the 
socialists,  and  by  a  noble  company  of  men  and  women  who 


In  the 

Hapsburg 

dominions 


In  the 

United 

States 


Fraternity 


34 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Develop- 
ment of  na- 
tionalism 


"Nations" 


wished  to  bring  war  to  an  end,  make  humanity  better, 
and  do  as  they  would  be  done  by.  But  the  conception  of 
fraternity  ran  counter  to  the  spirit  of  nationalism,  which 
found  new  birth  in  Revolutionary  times,  and  which,  be- 
coming constantly  stronger,  marked  men  off  in  national 
divisions  ever  more  sharply. 

Nationalism,  which  may  be  understood  as  the  conscious- 
ness of  a  body  of  people  that  they  are  closely  bound  to- 
gether by  certain  ties,  and  that  they  are  in  some  manner 
separate  and  distinct  from  others,  is  to  a  great  extent  a 
development  of  the  period  since  1789.  Of  old  people 
were  held  together,  for  the  most  part,  in  small  groups 
by  family  ties  and  blood  relationship,  and  sometimes 
brought  together  in  larger  groups  by  interest,  despotism, 
or  force.  Athenians  were  keenly  conscious  of  their  solidar- 
ity as  citizens  of  Athens,  and  the  Dorians  of  Sparta  or  the 
inhabitants  of  Corinth  had  similar  feeling,  but  never  were 
the  Hellenes  able  to  coalesce  into  one  Greek  nation.  The 
inhabitants  of  the  broad  Roman  Empire  were  so  long 
united  under  good  laws  and  admirable  political  organiza- 
tion that  they  could  not  but  be  conscious  of  some  com- 
munity in  one  Roman  state.  During  the  Middle  Ages, 
however,  much  of  Europe  was  for  a  while  broken  up  in 
small  parts,  under  the  "feudal  system."  Much  of  it  long 
remained  so  divided;  and  it  was  impossible  to  make  either 
a  united  Italy  or  a  united  Germany  until  long  after  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century.  "Nation "  had  not  yet 
the  meaning  afterward  given  it.  In  ancient  times  it  had 
denoted  a  group  of  people  connected  by  blood-relation- 
ship {nati,  born),  and  in  medieval  times  it  was  used  at 
the  great  universities  to  denote  a  body  of  students  who 
had  come  from  the  same  country.  After  a  while  strong 
nation  states  well  organized  were  built  up  in  England, 
in  France,  and  presently  in  Spain.  Within  these  states 
there  gradually  developed  among  many  people  strong 
feeling   of  nationality.     But   how  incomplete   the    work 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


35 


often  remained  is  evident  in  that  all  through  the  Middle 
Ages  the  north  of  England  was  loosely  hound  to  the 
other  portions,  and  that  Catalonia  has  not  yet  been 
really  united  in  national  conseiousness  with  the  rest  of 
Spain.  The  ideals  c;herished  by  many  of  the  great  leaders 
in  the  Middle  Ages  had  been  contrary  to  the  development 
of  nationalism,  and  had  tended  toward  establishing  a 
common  citizenship  in  one  great  European  Empire  or  one 
great  Church;  and  it  should  be  noted  that  even  in  the 
eighteenth  century  there  was  among  the  rulers  and  en- 
lightened classes,  who  were  relatively  more  important 
then  than  now,  considerable  feeling  of  internationalism 
and  consciousness  of  common  European  civilization,. 

Nationalism  entered  upon  a  new,  a  splendid,  and  a 
terrible  development  in  connection  ^^^th  the  French 
Revolution.  In  1793  a  great  European  coalition  was 
formed  to  overthrow  the  new  system  in  France.  The 
people  already  had  a  strong  feeling  of  nationality,  based 
on  their  language,  their  civ^ilization,  and  traditions,  and 
they  had  on  memorable  occasions  before  come  forward  to 
save  the  patrie  when  pressing  danger  threatened.  Now  to 
all  the  old  feeling  of  oneness  as  a  French  nation  were  added 
an  ardor  and  an  enthusiasm  sprung  from  belief  that  among 
them  a  glorious  new  era  of  the  rights  of  man  and  his 
greater  happiness  had  come.  Accordingly,  Frenchmen 
rushed  forward  to  save  the  Revolution  which  seemed  to 
have  brought  such  great  gifts,  France  was  defended,  and 
soon  after  French  nationalism  and  Revolutionary  ardor, 
guided  by  the  supreme  military  ability  of  Napoleon,  con- 
quered a  large  part  of  Europe. 

The  success  of  Napoleon  and  the  French  came  in  no 
small  part  from  the  ardent  spirit  of  French  nationality 
opposed  to  j>eoples  among  whom  this  feeling  was  not  yet 
so  strong.  But  the  conquests  and  oppressions  of  the 
French  awakened  stronger  nationalism  in  other  countries 
also.     This  spirit  flaming  forth  in  1808  made  Spaniards 


Slow 
progress 


Nationalism 
in  France 


In  other 
countries 


36 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Nationalism 
during  the 
nineteenth 
century 


Revival  and 

larger 

growth 


willing  to  give  up  all  that  Spain  might  be  free  again.  Such 
feeling  \^;:as  roused  among  the  Slavs  when  Napoleon  en- 
tered Russia  in  1812.  Prussia  had  been  humbled  to  the 
dust,  but  the  strong  feeling  of  nationality  rising  there  and 
spreading  thence  to  other  German  countries  prepared  the 
way  for  the  War  of  Liberation  and  Napoleon's  final  down- 
fall. 

During  the  nineteenth  century  nationalism  developed 
ever  more  strongly.  To  the  impulse  of  the  French 
Revolution  succeeded  the  effects  of  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion, improved  communication,  and  general  systems  of 
education.  People  were  brought  together  in  cities  and 
towns  more  than  previously,  and  there  they  could  be  more 
quickly  and  easily  reached  by  a  common  feeling.  As 
the  railroads,  steamships,  telegraphs,  and  newspapers  did 
their  work,  it  is  true  that  all  the  parts  of  Europe  and  in- 
deed of  the  world  were  bound  in  union  as  never  before;  but 
the  effects  of  this  unification  were  felt  more  strongly  within 
the  boundaries  of  a  country  than  through  an  entire  con- 
tinent, and  tended  more  toward  the  development  of 
nationalism  than  any  international  spirit.  Especially 
did  the  spread  of  education  make  it  possible  for  the  old 
literature  and  language  and  the  national  character  and 
consciousness  embodied  in  them  to  affect  more  strongly 
large  bodies  of  people  and  bind  them  closely  together. 
Early  in  the  nineteenth  century  renewed  study  of  the 
Greek  classics  in  Greece  prepared  the  way  for  revival  of 
nationality  there  and  for  winning  independence.  Dur- 
ing the  first  half  of  the  century  growing  national  conscious- 
ness prepared  the  way  for  a  united  Italy  and  a  united 
Germany  at  last.  By  1870  almost  all  Italy  except  Rome 
had  been  brought  together  in  a  strong  nation  state,  and 
by  1866  most  of  the  German  people  had  been  assembled 
in  two  great  groups  which  would  shortly  be  united  in  a 
German  Empire. 

If  nationality  was  bringing  together  groups  of  people 


GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO  INC  N  Y 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION 


37 


in  strong  unions  for  their  happiness  and  advantage,  it 
was  also  dividing  European  society  more  sharply,  and 
threatening  to  break  to  pieces  states  not  well  united. 
Under  the  impulse  of  their  national  feeling  and  interests 
Frenchmen  and  Germans  were  preparing  to  fight  out  their 
differences  in  a  mortal  struggle.  In  1848  in  the  Hapsburg 
dominions  Germans  were  hoping  to  Teutonize  the  subject 
races  so  as  to  make  one  stronger  nation;  but  in  Hungary 
the  Magyars  planned  to  Magyarize  the  Slavic  peoples, 
while  the  Slavs  in  both  Austria  and  Hungary — Bohemians, 
Serbs,  Croats,  as  well  as  the  Rumans  of  Transylvania — 
yearned  to  keep  their  own  language  and  culture  and  even 
to  attain  independence.  In  1867  the  Germans  of  Austria 
had  been  forced  to  concede  equality  to  the  Magyars,  but 
the  two  then  arranged  to  hold  down  the  other  peoples, 
who  remained  as  unwilling  subjects.  Even  in  Ireland, 
where  British  conquest,  apparently,  had  at  last  been 
succeeded  by  assimilation,  and  where  by  1850  the  Celtic 
language  began  to  seem  doomed  to  extinction,  the  Young 
Ireland  movement,  a  precursor  of  the  present  Sinn  Fein, 
was  striving  to  preserve  the  old  spirit  and  language,  and 
waken  Irish  nationality  again. 


National 
feeling  also 
a  disintegrat- 
ing force 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  causes  of  the  French  Revolution:  E.  J.  Lowell,  The  Eve 

of  the  French  Revolution  (1892) ;  Arthur  Young,  Travels  in  France 
and  Italy  during  the  Years  1787,  1788,  and  1789  (many  editions); 
Aime  Cherest,  La  Chute  de  VAncien  Regime,  1787-1789,  3  vols. 
(1884-6);  Charles  Gomel,  Les  Causes  Financieres  de  la  Revolu- 
tion Frangaise,  2  vols.  (1892-3) ;  Maxime  Kovalevsky,  La  France 
Economique  et  Sociale  d  la  Veille  de  la  Revolution,  2  vols.  (1909-1 1) 
excellent. 

Political  and  social  thought  before  the  Revolution:  T.  F. 
Rocquain,  L'Esprit  Revoluiionnaire  avanf  la  Revolution,  1715- 
1789  (1878),  trans,  by  J.  D.  Hunting  (1891);  Henri  See,  Les 
IdSes  Politiques  en  France  an  XVIIV  Siecle  (1920).  For  the 
great  writers  who  assisted  and  interpreted  the  changes:  John 


'88  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

(Viscount)  Morlej%  Diderot  and  the  EncydojxBdists,  2  vols. 
(1891),  Voltaire  (1903),  Critical  Miscellanies,  4  vols.  (1892- 
1908);  Arthur  Chuquet,  J.  J.  Rousseau  (1901).  It  is  greatly 
desirable  that  the  student  examine  some  of  the  writings  them- 
selves: Montesquieu,  De  r Esprit  des  Lois  (1748);  Rousseau, 
Co7itrat  Social  (1762);  Voltaire,  Dictionnaire  Philosophique 
(1764). 

The  Revolution :  the  best  of  the  shorter  works  is  Louis  Made- 
lin.  La  Revolution  (1911),  trans.  The  French  Revolution  (1916). 
Also  H.  E.  Bourne,  The  Revolutionary  Period  in  Europe  (1763- 
1S15)  (1914) ;  J.  H.  Rose,  The  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  Era, 
1789-18151(1898).  Of  longer  works  the  best  is  Alphonse  Aulard, 
Histoire  Politique  de  la  Revolution  Frangaise,  1789-180^-  (3d.  ed. 
1905.),  trans,  by  Bernard  Miall,  4  vols.  (1910).  Of  longer  works: 
Albert  Sorel,  VEurope  et  la  Revolution  Frangaise,  8  vols.  (1885- 
1904);  H.  M.  Stephens,  A  History  of  the  French  Revolution,  2 
vols.  (1886-91);  Heinrich  von  Sybel,  Geschichte  der  Revolution- 
zeit  von  1789,  5  vols.  (3d  ed.  1865-79),  trans,  by  W.  C.  Perry, 
4  vols.  (1867-9). 

Laws,  constitutions,  and  sources:  L.  G.  W.  Legg,  Select 
Documents  Illustrative  of  the  French  Revolution,  2  vols.  (1905) ; 
Leon  Cahen  and  Raymond  Guyot,  UCEuvre  Legislative  de  la 
Revolution  (1913),  best.  Of  the  sources  there  are  two  great 
collections:  Archives  Parlementaires  de  1787  a  1860:  Recueil 
Complet  des  Debats  LSgislatifs  et  Politiques  des  Chambres  Fran- 
gaises,  127  vols.  (2d  ed.  1879-1913);  P.  J.  B.  Buchez  and  P.  C. 
Roux-Lavergne,  Histoire  Parlementaire  de  la  Revolution  Fran- 
gaise, 1789-1815,  40  vols.  (1834-8),  containing  extracts  from 
debates,  newspapers,  and  pamphlets  of  the  time. 

Napoleon :  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  Napoleon  (1912),  is  the  best  brief 
study  in  English.  August  Fournier,  Napoleon  I:  eine  Bio- 
graphic, 3  vols.  (3d.  ed.  1914),  trans,  by  A.  E.  Adams  (1912), 
is  the  best  of  the  longer  works.  Also,  R.  M.  Johnston,  Napoleon, 
A  ShoH  Biography  (1910);  F.  M.  Kircheisen,  Napoleon  I:  Sein 
Leben  und  Seine  Zeit,  vols.  I-III  (1912-14);  Frederic  Masson, 
NapoUon  et  Sa  Famille,  12  vols.  (5th  ed.  1897-1915) ;  J.  H.  Rose, 
The  Life  of  Napoleon  I  (ed.  1907),  The  Personality  of  Napoleon 
(1912);  W.  M.  Sloane,  The  Life  of  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  4  vols, 
(ed.  1910);  L.  A.  Thiers,  Histoire  du  Considat  et  de  VEmpire, 
20  vols.  (1844-62),  laudatory.  F.  J.  Maccunn,  The  Contem- 
porary English  View  of  Napoleon  (1914),  for  much  rare  and 
curious  contemporary  information, 


THE    FRENCH    REVOLUTION        39 

The  settlement  of  1814-15:  C.  K.  Webster,  The  Congress  of 
Vienna,  1814-1815  (1918),  the  best  for  the  Congress;  W.  A. 
PhilHps,  The  Confederation  of  Europe  (2ci  ed.  1919);  A.  Sorel, 
Essais  d'Uistoire  et  de  Critique,  12th  ed.  (1884),  contains  ac- 
counts of  such  leading  statesmen  of  the  period  as  Metternich 
and  Talleyrand. 

Political  Conditions  and  Progress:  F.  M.  Anderson,  Constitu- 
tions and  Other  Select  Documents  Illustrative  of  the  History  of 
France,  1789-1901  (ed.  1909);  W.  L.  Blease,  A  Short  Ilistonj 
of  English  Liberalism  (1913);  Hans  Blum,  Die  Deutsche  Revolu- 
tion, 1848-1849  (1897),  best  study  of;  Albert  Cremieux,  La 
Revolution  de  Fevrier  (1912),  best  account  of  the  Revolution  of 
1848  in  France;  G.  L.  Dickinson,  Revolution  and  Reaction  in 
Modern  France  (1892),  excellent  account  in  brief  essays  on  the 
period  1789-1871  in  France;  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  Studies  in  Napole- 
onic Statesmaiiship:  Germany  (1903),  brilliant  and  admirable, 
The  Republican  Tradition  in  Europe  (1911);  Evelyn  (Countess) 
Martinengo-Cesaresco,  The  Liberation  of  Italy,  1815-1870 
(1895);  Paul  Matter,  La  Prusse  et  la  Revolution  de  18/^8  (1903); 
Sir  T.  E.  May,  Constitutional  History  of  England  Since  the  Ac- 
cession of  George  III  (edited  and  continued  by  Francis  Holland), 
3  vols.  (1912);  W.  R.  A.  Morfill,  History  of  Russia  from  the  Birth 
of  Peter  the  Great  to  the  Death  of  Alexander  II  (1902) ;  E.  Ollivier, 
UEmpire  Liberal,  17  vols.  (1895-1914);  E.  and  A.  G.  Porritt, 
The  Unreformed  House  of  Commons,  2  vols.  (ed.  1909);  G.  M. 
Trevelyan,  Lord  Grey  of  the  Reform  Bill  (1920) ;  Sir  A.  W.  Ward, 
Germany,  1815-1890,  3  vols.  (1910-19). 

National  feeling:  J.  H.  Rose,  Nationality  in  Modern  History 
(1916). 


CHAPTER  III 

NEW  INVENTIONS   AND   THE   INDUS- 
TRIAL REVOLUTION 

Nam  instrumenta  navigandi  possunt  fieri  sine  hominibus  remiganti- 
bus,  ut  naves  maximae,  fluviales  et  marinae,  ferantur  unico  homine 
regente,  majori  velocitate  quam  si  plense  essent  hominibus.  Item 
currus  possunt  fieri  ut  sine  animali  moveantur  cum  impetu  insesti- 
mabili.  .  .  .  Item  instrumentum,  parvum  in  quantitate,  ad  elevan- 
dum  et  deprimendum  pondera  quasi  infinita,  quo  nihil  utihus  est 
in  casu. 

Roger  Bacon,  De  Secretis  Operibus  Artis  et  Naturce,  c.  iv. 
(c.  1249). 

Les  conditions  du  travail  subissaient  la  plus  profonde  modifica- 
tion qu'elles  aient  eprouvee  depuis  I'origine  des  societes.  Deux 
machines,  desormais  immortelles,  la  machine  a  vapeur  et  la  ma- 
chine a  filer,  bouleversaient  le  vieux  systeme  commercial  et  f aisaient 
naitre  presque  au  meme  moment  des  produits  materiels  et  des  ques- 
tions sociales,  inconnus  a  nos  peres. 
Adolphe  Blanqui,  Histoire  de  VEconomie  Politique  en  Europe 
ii.  207,  208  (1837). 

The  essence  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  is  the  substitution  of  com- 
petition for  the  medieval  regulations  which  had  previously 
controlled  the  production  and  distribution  of  wealth.  On  this 
account  it  is  not  only  one  of  the  most  important  facts  of  English 
history,  but  Europe  owes  to  it  the  growth  of  two  great  systems 
of  thought — Economic  Science,  and  its  antithesis,  Socialism. 

Arnold  Toynbee,  Lectures  on  the  Industrial  Revolution,  p.  85 
(1884). 

Older  con-  DIFFERENT  as  conditions  now  are  from  what  they  were 

ditions  fifty  years  ago,  the  difference  between  1870  and  1750  or 

1789  is  much  more  striking.  In  many  respects  conditions 
in  the  second  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  were  nearer 
to  what  they  had  been  five  hundred  or  a  thousand  years 
before  than  to  what  they  were  a  hundred  years  later. 

40 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


41 


There  were  no  railroads  then,  no  steamboats,  no  tele- 
graphs, no  telephones.  It  was  diffieult  for  most  people 
to  get  light  after  the  sun  went  down  or  heat  when  the 
weather  was  cold.  Refrigeration  or  preserving  of  fo(jd 
was  scarcely  employed  yet.  All  sorts  of  inventions  and 
mechanical  appliances,  which  later  on  were  to  make 
life  so  much  easier  and  more  pleasant,  had  not  yet  ap- 
peared. And  above  all,  the  machines  which  were  to 
revolutionize  industry  and  transportation  and  make  it 
possible  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  world  for 
a  great  surplus  of  necessaries  and  luxuries  to  be  produced, 
had  not  yet  appeared,  except  to  some  extent  in  England, 
and  even  there  were  only  at  the  beginning  of  their  service. 

By  1870  steam  and  electricity  were  the  servants  of  man 
and  for  him  were  performing  countless  tasks,  though  many 
of  the  devices  employed  then  seem  very  crude  compared 
with  what  came  later.  By  that  time  in  every  important 
country  in  western  Europe  machines  in  factories  were 
performing  vastly  more  work  than  men  unaided  could 
have  accomplished,  and  were  producing  immense  store 
of  manufactured  things.  By  that  time,  through  ap- 
plication of  machinery,  means  of  transportation  had  been 
so  revolutionized  that  it  was  possible  for  travellers  to 
move  quickly  and  freight  to  be  transported  more  easily 
than  ever  before.  It  was  now  possible  for  many  people 
in  western  Europe  to  get  coal  for  heating  their  houses, 
and  artificial  lighting  was  being  generally  used.  News 
was  now  collected  quickly,  and  immediately  disseminated 
in  great  numbers  of  newspapers  printed  by  machinery. 
Such  large  alterations  were  then  going  on  that  the  changes 
in  the  nineteenth  century  have  seemed  greater  and  more 
important  than  in  all  of  the  centuries  preceding.  These 
alterations  were  most  of  all  due  to  numerous  scientific 
inventions,  and  to  the  machines  which  brought  about 
the  Industrial  Rev^olution. 

Rude  steam  engines,  invented  at  least  as  early  as  the 


Important 
things  lack- 
ing there 


Conditions 
in  1870 


42 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Transpor- 
tation 


Interchange 
of  commodi- 
ties and 
materials 


Conveni- 
ences in 
dwelling 
houses 


end  of  the  seventeenth  century,  were  first  used  for  pump- 
ing water  from  mines.  Many  since  forgotten  probably 
contributed  to  the  development,  but  the  invention  is  now 
associated  especially  with  the  name  of  Thomas  New- 
comen  (1705)  and  above  all  with  that  of  James  Watt 
(1769).  Many  were  the  industrial  uses  to  which  these 
engines  were  put  in  England.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century  efforts  were  made  to  apply  them  to 
moving  vehicles  on  land  and  ships  on  the  sea.  Along  with 
several  other  inventors  Robert  Fulton,  an  American, 
devoted  himself  to  the  making  of  a  "steamboat,"  and  fully 
succeeded  by  1807.  In  the  next  year  Richard  Trevithick 
ran  the  first  steam  engine  along  a  railway  in  London.  In 
1825  George  Stephenson  made  a  far  more  powerful  loco- 
motive, and  presently  railway  systems  connected  all  the 
principal  cities  of  Europe.  In  1838  the  steamship  Great 
Western  crossed  the  Atlantic  in  two  weeks. 

The  result  of  this  revolution  in  transportation  was  that 
food  could  be  moved  from  districts  where  it  was  produced 
to  other  places  far  away,  with  a  speed  never  possible  be- 
fore. In  like  manner  the  materials  for  building  and  con- 
struction were  carried  from  the  forests  and  the  quarries 
and  the  mines,  making  more  easily  possible  the  construc- 
tion of  great  edifices,  gigantic  bridges,  and  public  im- 
provements, on  a  scale  scarcely  dreamed  of  before,  as  well 
as  a  multitude  of  dwelling  houses.  And  because  of  im- 
provements in  mining  and  the  revolution  in  transporta- 
tion, coal  was  easily  procured  to  be  used  in  factories  for 
manufacturing  and  to  heat  the  houses  in  which  people 
lived. 

The  habitations  of  people  were  presently  furnished 
with  more  conveniences  than  had  ever  been  the  case  in 
the  past.  Not  since  the  time  when  the  great  Roman  cities 
were  provided  with  water  brought  through  stone  pipes 
had  men  and  women  had  plentiful  supply.  In  the  Middle 
Ages  and  for   some  time  after,  even  in  the  prosperous 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


43 


cities  and  towns,  people  generally  got  their  water  from 
wells  and  cisterns.  There  was  seldom  a  sufficient  supply 
of  water  in  the  houses  themselves.  Such  was  the  in- 
convenience of  getting  it  that  most  people  washed  them- 
selves seldom.  Baths  were  apt  to  be  taken  in  rivers 
when  warm  weather  came;  and  a  London  apprentice 
of  the  eighteenth  century  declared  that  sometimes  for 
six  weeks  he  never  washed  his  face.  It  was  convenient 
to  be  dirty;  and  in  the  Middle  Ages  some  had  regarded 
filth  as  a  sign  of  gotxiness.  The  result  was  the  numerous 
skin  diseases,  with  which  people  were  once  tortured  much 
more  than  now,  and  the  many  epidemics  and  plagues 
which  came  from  dirt  and  unsanitary  living.  In  the 
latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  and  especially  during 
the  nineteenth,  the  great  cities  and  even  the  more  prosper- 
ous towns  brought  plentiful  supplies  of  water  from  some 
undefiled  source  at  a  distance,  and  distributed  it  through 
small  pipes  of  iron  into  houses.  The  better  heating  now 
made  it  possible  to  get  supplies  of  hot  water  in  dwellings, 
something  not  easily  done  since  hypocausts  were  used  by 
the  Romans.  This  again  led  to  greater  cleanliness  in 
winter,  and  presently  bathtubs  of  wood  lined  with  tin 
appeared  in  increasing  numbers,  and  many  people  now 
bathed  as  often  as  once  in  a  week. 

During  this  same  time  a  marvellous  change  was  made 
in  artificial  lighting.  In  the  absence  of  sunlight,  alwaj^s 
man's  principal,  and  often  his  sole,  reliance,  torches, 
braziers,  candles,  and  lamps  had  been  used  at  night  by 
those  who  were  able  to  afford  them.  But  down  to  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  it  was  not  even  easy 
to  get  fire  or  a  light  in  the  first  place,  since  this  was  usually 
done  by  flint  and  tinder  or  else  keeping  a  coal  alive. 
Moreover,  oil  and  tallow  were  expensive  for  most  people 
and  not  to  be  obtained  in  large  amounts.  About  the  end 
of  the  eighteenth  century  gas  made  from  coal  was  used  to 
Illuminate   factories   and   homes;   during   the   next   fifty 


Supply  of 
water 


Artificial 
lighting 


44 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Machinery 


The 

Industrial 

Revolution 


years  its  use  was  widely  extended;  and  poor  and  ghastly 
as  such  light  often  seemed  to  a  later  generation,  it  fur- 
nished good  artificial  illumination  for  more  people  than 
anything  before  it.  In  1782,  Argand,  a  Swiss  inventor 
working  in  England,  perfected  a  lamp  better  than  any 
previously  used.  Oil  for  such  lamps  now  began  to  be 
obtained  in  ever  greater  quantities,  first  from  whales,  then 
petroleum  from  the  earth,  until  more  and  more  people 
without  gas  supply  could  have  what  even  now  seems  a 
fairly  good  light.  Then  about  1827  certain  Englishmen 
invented  matches,  slender  splints  of  wood  dipped  in  some 
material  easily  rubbed  and  ignited:  an  invention  simple 
enough,  but  affording  as  much  convenience  as  almost 
anything  in  the  nineteenth  century. 

\^liile  these  changes,  one  after  another,  were  effecting 
so  great  a  revolution  in  the  life  of  Europe,  and  affording 
to  unnumbered  common  people  conveniences  previously 
in  the  reach  of  the  wealthy  alone  and  often  not  to  be  ob- 
tained at  any  price,  another  series  of  changes  was  trans- 
forming life  even  more  profoundly.  These  changes  came 
in  consequence  of  the  introduction  of  labor-saving  ma- 
chines, which  made  it  possible  to  produce  greater  quanti- 
ties of  goods  more  quickly  and  more  easily  than  ever 
before,  and  which  presently  effected  an  immense  altera- 
tion in  industry  and  in  social  relations. 

The  Industrial  Revolution,  as  this  movement  has  long 
been  called,  began  in  Great  Britain.  During  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  centuries  there  had  been  in  all  the 
principal  countries  of  western  Europe  much  progress  in 
science  and  invention.  In  the  eighteenth  century,  for 
particular  reasons,  this  progress  entered  on  a  new  stage 
in  England  and  Scotland.  The  position  of  Great  Britain 
made  her  safe  from  foreign  invaders,  and  there  was  already 
very  great  wealth  accumulated  from  business  and  trade. 
A  strong,  well-organized  government  afforded  security 
and  order,  at  the  same  time  that  the  inhabitants  enjoyed 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


45 


protection  of  the  law  and  had  much  individual  freedom. 
The  old  guild  restrictions,  by  which  industry  had  first 
been  regulated  and  then  retarded,  had  passed  away  in 
Britain  much  more  than  in  neighboring  Continental 
countries,  giving  nmch  freedom  and  opportunity  for  the 
adventurous  and  those  capable  of  embarking  in  new 
enterprises.  Moreover,  the  genius  of  the  British  people 
tended  particularly  toward  the  practical  application  of 
science  and  the  making  of  things  which  would  work  for 
some  purpose.  Above  all,  though  before  that  time  men  had 
paid  little  attention  to  it,  Britain  possessed  huge  stores  of 
coal  and  iron,  and,  what  was  equally  important,  they  lay 
in  such  close  proximity  that  they  could  easily  be  used 
together. 

The  Industrial  Revolution  began  in  England  with  a 
series  of  inventions  which  revolutionized  the  textile  in- 
dustry. In  medieval  times  good  clothing  was  difficult  to 
make  and  expensive  to  buy.  Notwithstanding  that 
princes  and  great  men  were  splendidly  appareled  and  had 
abundance  of  fine  raiment,  the  process  of  making  clothes 
was  so  difficult  and  lengthy  that  the  multitude  of  man- 
kind could  not  have  many  garments,  and  wore  such  as 
they  had  as  long  as  they  could  hold  them  together.  The 
fibres,  cotton,  silk,  or  wool,  had  to  be  slowly  arranged  by 
hand,  then  patiently  spun  on  a  wheel  worked  by  foot, 
then  the  threads  woven  by  hand  into  cloth.  Relatively 
to  the  number  of  people,  not  much  cloth  could  be  pro- 
duced thus,  save  by  disproportionate  expenditure  of  time. 

In  1738  an  Englishman,  John  Kay,  invented  the  flying 
shuttle  with  w^hich  weaving  could  be  done  more  rapidly 
than  ever  before.  No  great  change  followed,  however, 
since  the  thread  used  by  the  weavers  was  still  slowly  spun 
in  the  old  manner.  But  about  1770  a  spinning  "jenny" 
or  engine  was  completed  by  James  Ilargreaves,  in  which 
a  number  of  spinning  wheels  could  be  turned  by  revolving 
a  crank,  and  a  spinner  could  now  make  eight  threads  at 


The  old 
textile  in- 
dustry 


Revolution 
in  the 
textile  in- 
dustry 


46 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Spinning 
machines 
and  weaving 
machines 


Immense 
conse- 
quences 


The  old  in- 
dustrial 
system 


once.  As  a  result  of  these  mechanical  contrivances 
manufacturers,  that  is  laborers  working  with  their  hands, 
in  the  old  way,  could  accomplish  much  more  than  be- 
fore. Nine  years  later  Samuel  Crompton  perfected  the 
"spinning-mule"  by  which  a  great  deal  more  thread  could 
be  produced.  The  next  large  step  forward  consisted  in  the 
operation  of  these  machines  by  power.  In  1769  Richard 
Arkwright  began  to  run  his  spinning  engines  by  water 
power.  In  1785  Edmund  Cartwright  applied  water  power 
to  a  weaving  machine,  so  that  one  boy  with  the  machine 
could  make  more  cloth  than  three  skilled  weavers  without 
it.  During  all  this  time  the  steam  engine  had  been  develop- 
ing; it  was  soon  used  in  the  new  factories  to  drive  an  in- 
creasing nmnber  of  new  machines,  which  were  invented 
for  many  different  kinds  of  work. 

These  machines,  especially  the  power  machines,  soon 
brought  enormous  changes.  In  1837  a  French  writer, 
looking  back  over  the  progress  which  by  that  time  had 
become  much  clearer,  declared  that  while  his  countrymen 
had  been  passing  through  such  great  experiences  in  the 
French  Revolution,  the  English  had  begun  their  revolution 
in  the  domain  of  industry.  "Conditions  of  work,"  he 
said,  "underwent  the  profoundest  modification  which 
had  been  known  since  society  began."  Not  only  could 
immensely  greater  quantities  of  goods  be  produced,  but 
there  arose  a  new  controlling  class,  the  capitalists  who 
owned  the  machines,  and  the  position  of  the  artisans 
was  soon  greatly  altered. 

In  medieval  times  manufacturing  had  been  rudely 
carried  on  in  people's  houses,  or  under  the  guild  system, 
in  which  masters,  or  small  proprietors,  worked  them- 
selves along  with  apprentices  in  small  establishments. 
In  course  of  time  the  guilds  decayed,  and  by  the  eigh- 
teenth century  in  England  had  largely  disappeared.  But 
manufacturing  continued  to  be  done  in  small  estab- 
lishments, mainly  in  the  houses  of  the  workmen  them- 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION         47 


selves.  The  man  of  the  house  wove  his  cloth  or  made 
his  knives  or  his  shoes,  assisted  by  his  wife  and  his  chil- 
dren; or,  where  the  guild  system  survived,  the  master 
worked  in  the  midst  of  the  apprentices  who  under  him 
were  learning  the  trade.  During  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  this  arrangement  was  being  partly 
superseded,  especially  in  England,  by  small  factories  and 
capitalism;  nevertheless,  most  of  the  manufacturing  con- 
tinued to  be  done  by  the  domestic  system,  in  the  houses  of 
the  workers,  many  of  whom  were  their  own  masters, 
toiling  for  themselves.  Where  the  master  worked  with 
apprentices  or  hired  workingmen  the  relations  which 
existed  between  them  were  necessarily  personal,  intimate, 
and  close.  The  father  might  be  a  little  tyrant  over 
children  and  wife;  a  bad  master  might  abuse  or  overwork 
his  apprentices;  but  there  were  many  who  looked  out  for 
the  welfare  of  their  helpers,  and  this  they  were  able  to  do 
because  they  lived  and  worked  in  the  midst  of  these  help- 
ers. 

During  the  eighteenth  century  capitalism  was  playing 
more  and  more  part  in  the  organization  of  manufactur- 
ing, wealthy  men  paying  house  workers  for  their  labor, 
supplying  them  with  the  material  to  be  wrought,  and 
taking  from  them  the  manufactured  goods.  The  new 
machines  themselves  at  first  involved  no  very  great 
change.  The  first  machines  were  not  very  cumbersome 
or  costly,  and  successful  workmen  could  buy  them.  The 
heavy  power  machines,  which  presently  appeared,  how- 
ever, could  only  be  obtained  by  those  who  had  consider- 
able capital  to  buy  them  and  put  up  large  buildings  in 
which  to  instal  them.  Accordingly,  in  England,  and 
afterward  wherever  the  large  machines  were  brought 
into  use,  the  domestic  system  of  industry  was  largely 
crushed  out.  With  the  new  machines  the  work  could  be 
done  much  more  easily,  and  nmch  more  produced,  so  that 
workers  under  the  old  system  could  not  long  continue 


Domestic 
industry 


The  new 

industrial 

system 


48 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Domestic 
industry 
crushed  out 


Depression 
of  the 
workers 


competition.  For  a  while  they  would  strive  desperately, 
working  longer  hours  and  selling  their  products  for  less 
than  they  had  taken  before,  but  generally  in  the  end  they 
failed.  Most  of  them  went  from  their  cottages  and 
spinning-wheels  and  hand-looms  to  the  towns  where  the 
factories  were  rising,  and  asked  for  factory  employment. 
In  consequence,  the  large  class  of  small  manufacturers  and 
masters  dwindled  away,  and  in  their  place  arose  a  small 
class  of  powerful  and  wealthy  capitalist  owners  of  fac- 
tories with  large  machines.  Over  against  them  was  an 
army  of  employees  working  in  these  factories  for  wages. 
Constantly  the  gap  between  employers  and  employees 
widened,  and  less  and  less  close  were  relations  between 
them.  Once  the  master  had  known  his  men  and  worked 
with  them;  now  the  capitalist  employed  hundreds  of 
"hands,"  with  whom  he  often  had  little  contact  and  no 
sympathy  and  no  acquaintance.  There  had  always  been 
a  gap  between  the  upper  and  the  lower  members  of  the 
industrial  system;  now  it  became  a  great  gulf,  constantly 
more  striking  to  the  eye,  and  ever  more  difficult  to  cross. 
Under  the  new  system  the  condition  of  the  workers  at 
the  start  became  rapidly  worse.  The  machines  forced 
them  out  of  the  old  way  of  working,  but  many  could  find 
no  employment  in  the  new  system.  It  had  long  been 
understood  that  new  inventions,  whatever  benefits  were 
to  come  later,  would  deprive  some  workers  of  the  chance 
to  labor.  Early  in  the  sixteenth  century  in  Danzig  a 
certain  one  had  invented  a  weaving  machine,  which  made 
four  or  six  pieces  at  once;  but  the  mayor,  so  the  story 
went,  "being  apprehensive  that  this  invention  might 
throw  a  large  number  of  workmen  on  the  streets,"  secretly 
put  the  inventor  to  death.  In  the  seventeenth  century 
such  machines  brought  about  riots  among  the  weavers 
in  Holland  and  in  England,  and  using  them  was  long 
forbidden  in  some  of  the  German  states.  Now  also  in 
England  it  was  found  that  with  labor-saving  machines  not 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


49 


so  many  workmen  were  required,  and  it  was  soon  dis- 
covered, moreover,  that  women  and  children  could  do 
much  of  the  work  formerly  done  })y  skilled  men.  The 
artisans  thus  thrown  out  of  work  resisted  their  fate, 
smashing  the  new  looms  or  trying  to  prevent  other  workers 
from  using  them;  but  this  soon  came  to  an  end  when  the 
authority  of  the  law  was  turned  against  them.  The 
crowds  of  workers,  larger  than  the  number  needed  by  the 
factory  owners,  bid  against  each  other  for  emplo;yTiient, 
and  were  thus  completely  at  the  mercy  of  employers,  be- 
ing forced  to  accept  such  wages  and  terms  as  were  offered. 
Moreover,  the  Industrial  Revolution  resulted  not 
merely  from  introducing  machines  which  revolutionized 
work,  but  from  a  new  policy  with  respect  to  industrial 
regulation.  Formerly  in  England  and  elsewhere  in 
Europe  the  general  policy  had  been  for  the  local  authori- 
ties or  the  government  of  the  state  to  regulate  industry, 
and  many  a  law  had  been  passed  to  assess  the  amount  of 
wages,  many  an  ordinance  to  specify  the  conditions  under 
which  work  should  be  done.  These  regulations  had  to 
some  extent  been  made  in  the  interests  of  the  upper  classes, 
but  they  were  also  intended  by  the  state  for  the  protection 
of  workers.  During  the  eighteenth  century,  however, 
the  idea  developed  that  all  such  outside  regulation  was 
interference  and  restriction,  which  hindered  much  more 
than  it  helped.  A  group  of  French  thinkers  taught  the 
doctrine  of  laissez-faire,  that  the  state  should  let  private 
enterprise  alone,  and  this  teaching  was  taken  over  into 
England,  especially  by  Adam  Smith.  Rousseau  and  his 
contemporaries  were  asserting  that  men  had  natural 
rights,  which  had  been  lessened  or  annulled  by  interference 
from  the  governments  above  them;  and  from  this  was 
developed  the  idea  that  men  should  have  complete  free- 
dom, without  any  governmental  regulation,  to  manage 
their  business  as  they  chose,  or  to  work  under  such  con- 
ditions   as    they   agreed   to    themselves.     Unfortunately 


Women  and 
children  in 
the  factories 


The  state 
and  industry 


Laissez-faire 


50 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


"Natural 
laws'' 


Industrial 
evils 


it  was  soon  evident  that  "freedom  of  contract"  and 
lai^sez-faire,  whatever  their  actual  and  theoretical  merits, 
and  however  much  they  were  acclaimed  by  economists 
and  philosophers  then,  soon  gave  more  power  to  capitalists 
and  employers,  and  put  the  laborers  in  more  lowly  sub- 
jection. 

The  government  ceased  intervening  to  regulate  and 
protect  the  workers,  and  the  new  laws  which  were  passed 
were  made  in  the  interests  of  the  upper  class  which  con- 
trolled the  state.  By  the  employing  class  laissez-faire 
was  welcomed  and  praised,  as  was  the  doctrine  then 
current  that  the  best  results  in  human  relations  would 
follow  from  each  man  seeking  his  own  selfish  interest. 
Poverty  and  suffering  came  from  natural  laws,  it  was  said, 
which  no  human  kindness  could  remove.  It  was  proper 
that  capitalists  should  take  as  high  profits  and  give  as 
low  wages  as  possible,  since  all  this  was  worked  out 
through  the  "natural  laws."  If  more  than  the  market 
wages  were  given,  it  would  simply  result  in  poor  people 
having  a  larger  number  of  children,  after  which  conditions 
would  be  as  before. 

So,  while  great  prosperity  came  to  many  factory  owners 
and  lenders  of  money,  while  Britain  went  forward  with 
immense  progress  in  wealth  and  in  power,  while  she  ob- 
tained from  her  factories  and  her  ships  the  strength  and 
the  resources  with  which  she  held  out  against  Napoleon 
to  the  end,  horrible  results  atfected  some  of  her  people. 
Workers  with  their  families  came  from  villages  and  small 
towns  to  the  factory  towns  seeking  work.  Wages  were 
driven  down  far  below  what  a  family  could  live  on.  Some 
could  find  no  work  at  all.  Mournful  and  squalid  quarters 
rose  rapidly  to  house  the  workers,  and  in  these  houses 
they  were  huddled  together  until  the  living  conditions 
became  terrible.  It  was  soon  discovered  that  the  machines 
could  be  operated  still  more  cheaply  by  getting  the  labor 
of  children,  and  more  and  more   were  children  put  to 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION         51 

work  in  the  factories.  At  first  the  foundlings  and  miser-  Child  labor 
able  inmates  of  workhouses,  who  were  purchased  and 
trafficked  in  almost  like  slaves,  were  obtained.  They 
were  put  to  more  toil  than  they  could  endure,  often  urged 
by  the  "overlooker's"  lash,  imprisoned  at  night  lest  they 
run  away,  and  given  no  wages,  since  according  to  the  law 
they  were  considered  to  be  apprentices  learning  tlicir 
trade.  As  a  result  of  this  competition  still  more  men  were 
put  out  of  work  and  wages  were  brought  even  lower. 
Presently  parents  were  forced  to  do  what  had  previously 
been  regarded  as  a  great  disgrace,  put  their  children  out 
to  work  in  the  factories.  Under  the  old  system  there  had 
been  much  labor  by  children,  but  most  of  it  had  been 
done  for  parents  in  the  home.  Now  the  conditions  under 
which  children  worked  became  worse,  and  seemed  still 
worse  since  they  could  be  more  readily  seen.  After  a 
while  many  men  remained  idle,  supported  by  the  labor  of 
their  women  and  children.  In  the  midst  of  dirt,  heat, 
stench,  whir  of  wheels,  and  clatter  of  looms,  children  were 
working  long  hours,  when  they  should  have  been  at 
play,  or,  according  to  our  ideas  now,  at  school.  Women 
were  working  so  long  and  so  hard  that  they  were  per- 
manently weakening  themselves,  unable  to  bear  strong 
children,  or  unable  to  give  birth  at  all.  In  the  factory 
towns  were  idle  men  and  underpaid  men.  The  standard 
of  living  went  lower  and  lower. 

Such  is  the  description  which  contemporaries  have  Degeneracy 
handed  down.  Doubtless  the  picture  should  not  all  be 
dark,  and  no  doubt  the  evils  have  been  exaggerated  and 
dwelt  on  too  nmch.  It  should  be  remembered  that  under 
the  old  system  there  were  many  evils,  much  hardship, 
and  many  bad  results.  The  evils  of  the  period  of  transi- 
tion, the  time  between  the  breakdown  of  the  old  system, 
with  the  decay  of  state  regulation,  and  the  new  period  when 
machine  industry  and  capitalism  were  thoroughly  estab- 
lished, are  not  well  remembered  now;  but  those  evils  were 


52 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  workers 
helpless 


Gradual 
ameliora- 
tion 


great,  and  were  afterward  lessened  by  the  Industrial 
Revolution  itself.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  the  evil  con- 
sequences of  the  Revolution  were  presently  evident  in 
the  degeneracy  of  a  portion  of  the  people.  For  a  long 
time  in  England  there  had  been  a  sturdy  agricultural 
population  from  which  came  the  fighting  men  who  won 
England's  wars;  now  the  rural  population  declined,  and 
it  was  seen  that  the  factory  towns  contained  many  poor, 
ill-nourished,  overworked  men,  women,  and  children, 
whose  health  and  physical  strength  were  decreasing. 

It  may  be  that  time  would  have  brought  some  adjust- 
ment, and  that  the  new  conditions  would  presently  have 
been  made  less  hard;  but  so  bad  did  they  actually  appear 
that  some  immediate  remedy  was  sought  for.  After  the 
end  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  when  men  had  space  to  think 
of  other  things  than  defending  England  from  foreign  foes, 
it  was  evident  that  there  was  much  discontent  among  the 
lower  classes  of  the  population  in  Britain.  These  were 
the  years  when  socialism  began  to  attract  attention,  and 
when  the  Chartists  asked  for  reform.  But  the  workers 
themselves  could  do  little.  The  concentration  of  wealth 
and  industrial  power,  which  the  machines  and  the  new 
organization  were  bringing,  made  it  hopeless  for  individual 
workers  to  resist  their  capitalist  masters.  Only  by  unit- 
ing could  they  hope  with  success  to  oppose  them.  Long 
before  workmen  had  attempted  to  form  combinations, 
but  always  such  unions  were  forbidden  by  law,  and  by  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  authorities  gen- 
erally considered  that  unions  of  workmen  were  harmful  to 
industry  and  dangerous  to  the  state.  In  1799  and  in  1800 
they  had  been  specifically  forbidden  in  Britain. 

It  was  afterward  evident  that  ''no  simple  remedy  would 
avail,  since  so  large  and  so  profound  was  the  alteration 
brought  to  pass  that  amelioration  and  adjustment  could 
only  come  from  patient  effort  and  the  working  of  time. 
In  Britain,  and  later  on  elsewhere,  the  doctrine  of  laissez- 


3     THE  COAL.  IKON,  AND 


L  RESOURCES  OF  ELTIOPE 


^__^  \  "^ ^ — ..^       V. 

®Teheran  I    ^-^  Kunduzo^-- 

R     S      I     A         ("AFGHANISTAN  / 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


53 


faire  was  presently  abandoned  more  and  more.  It  l)ecame 
apparent  to  the  best  people  that  "enlightened  self-inter- 
est" did  not  bring  the  best  results.  Laws  were  presently 
passed  by  whieh  the  government  limited  the  hours  of 
labor  for  women  and  ehildren,  and  ehildren  under  a  certain 
age  were  forbidden  to  work.  In  1824  and  1825  trade 
unions  of  workingmen  were  legalized,  though  for  a  long 
time  thereafter  the  authorities  hampered  them  greatly. 
The  regulation  of  industry  by  the  state,  however  great  a 
change  in  political  philosophy  it  involved,  was  at  first 
insuflBcient  and  ill-enforced,  while  the  first  trade  unions 
•were  usually  too  weak  to  win  contests  with  employers. 
To  some  people  during  this  period  it  seemed  that  the 
entire  existing  system  was  now  wrong;  such  great  changes 
had  been  made  that  fundamental  reforms  and  a  different 
social  system  were  needed  before  the  resultant  evils  could 
be  cured.  Thus  arose  one  of  the  most  important  intel- 
lectual and  social  developments  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
the  greater  growth  of  socialist  doctrines. 

The  Industrial  Revolution  was  first  marked  and  im- 
portant in  Great  Britain.  Perhaps  it  might  quickly  have 
spread  to  the  Continent,  but  for  a  generation  the  neigh- 
boring countries  were  absorbed  in  the  French  Revolution 
and  the  exliausting  wars  which  followed.  By  1815 
England  had  a  long  start,  had  amassed  much  wealth, 
and  had  become  the  workshop  of  the  world.  But  the 
industrial  changes  presently  took  place  in  the  other 
countries.  In  France  the  new  methods  and  machines 
soon  appeared,  and  along  with  them  the  factories,  the 
slums,  and  the  striking  new  social  problems.  A  great 
industrial  development  followed  with  much  prosperity, 
but  the  French  had  less  coal  and  iron  than  the  British,  and 
in  the  end  it  was  seen  that  the  temperament  of  the  people 
did  not  so  easily  adapt  itself  to  large-scale  production  and 
machine  work.  Hence  industrialism  never  did  assume 
such  large  proportions  in  France  as  in  England.     During 


X^aissez- 
faire  partly 
abandoned 


Spread  of 
the  Indus- 
trial Revolu- 
tion 


54 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Progress 
eastward  in 
Europe 


General 
results 


The  new 
upper  class 


the  same  time  the  Revolution  was  beginning  in  Belgium. 
Eastward  it  spread  across  the  German  countries,  and  by 
1870  the  north  German  states  were  in  the  midst  of  vast 
industrial  development.  It  did  not  come  to  Italy  until 
after  this  time,  and  it  did  not  reach  Russia  until  the  latter 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  It  began  to  affect  the 
countries  of  western  and  central  Europe  in  the  first  half 
of  the  century,  and  some  of  the  countries  of  eastern 
Europe,  to  a  less  extent,  in  the  years  which  followed. 
Generally  speaking,  the  Industrial  Revolution  made 
greatest  changes  only  in  those  countries  like  Britain, 
Belgium,  and  Germany,  where  great  deposits  of  coal  and 
iron  were  at  hand.  Italy,  Spain,  the  Balkans  lagged  far 
behind,  since  mostly  they  lacked  these  resources. 

The  greater  results  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  in 
Europe  were  not  apparent  for  a  while,  and  some  of  them 
were  not  understood  until  long  after  1870,  when  industrial 
growth  had  reached  far  greater  proportions.  Generally 
speaking,  the  consequences  were  an  alteration  in  the  rela- 
tive importance  of  classes  of  people  in  particular  districts, 
alteration  of  the  relative  importance  of  districts  or  coun- 
tries themselves,  the  rise  of  socialism  and  schemes  for  a 
social  organization  entirely  different  from  the  prevailing 
ones,  immense  changes  in  warfare  and  relative  military 
power,  increasing  importance  of  urban  life,  an  alteration 
in  the  position  and  status  of  women,  the  development  of 
democracy  and  the  spread  of  the  franchise,  an  increase  in 
the  quantity  of  things  which  serve  the  necessities  and  the 
pleasures  of  man,  and  a  greater  material  development  than 
had  ever  been  possible  before. 

In  antiquity,  during  the  Middle  Ages,  and  down  to 
the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century,  land  was  always  the 
most  important  property,  and  the  aristocracy,  the  upper 
class,  was  based  upon  the  holding  of  landed  property. 
Under  the  "feudal  system"  of  the  Middle  Ages  holding 
of  land  on  terms  of  some  sort  of  service  or  payment  was 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


55 


the  very  foundation  of  social  organization.  The  great 
landholders  were  the  nobles,  the  seigneurs,  the  lords  of  the 
manor,  in  possession  of  political  power,  local  jurisdiction, 
and  sometimes  of  the  offices  of  state.  In  the  eighteenth 
century,  under  the  centralized  governments  of  western 
Europe,  they  had  long  since  lost  all  independent  political 
power,  but  beneath  the  sovereign  they  made  the  class  which 
had  the  privileges  and  held  the  property  in  the  days  of  the 
Old  Regime.  The  exceptions  were  England  and  Holland, 
where  the  greater  members  of  the  middle  class,  the  bankers 
and  the  masters  of  commerce,  shared  the  control  of  aflFairs 
in  the  state  with  the  landed  nobility  above  them. 

The  effects  of  the  French  Revolution,  and  gradually 
its  later  consequences,  took  away  from  the  noble  pro- 
prietors their  power,  special  privileges,  and  in  some  places 
even  the  land  on  which  their  previous  position  had  been 
based.  But  if  the  French  Revolution  abased  one  upper 
class,  the  effects  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  assisted  in 
the  raising  of  another.  Long  before  1789  it  was  evident 
that  in  the  more  advanced  countries  of  western  Europe 
a  middle  class  of  bankers,  business  men,  and  members  of 
professions  was  becoming  increasingly  important.  As 
the  old  aristocracy  went  down  before  the  new  forces  this 
bourgeoisie  in  France,  and  later  on  elsewhere,  got  control 
and  reaped  some  of  the  greatest  benefits  from  the  changes. 
It  was  soon  evident  that  the  destruction  of  Revolutionary 
times  had  not  levelled  all  men  and  made  them  all  equal. 
"Aristocracy  alw^ays  exists,"  said  Napoleon.  "Destroy 
it  in  the  nobihty,  it  removes  itself  immediately  to  the  rich 
and  powerful  houses  of  the  middle  class."  And  he  added, 
what  seemed  more  prophetic  still  later:  "Destroy  it  in 
these,  it  survives  and  takes  refuge  with  the  leaders  of 
the  workshops  and  people."  He,  doubtless,  understood 
little  of  the  Industrial  Revolution,  but  in  the  first  half 
of  the  nineteenth  century  it  had  already  created  a  new 
class  of  wealthy  and  powerful  men,  who  more  and  more 


The  landed 
aristocracy 


The  bour- 
geoisie 


A  ruling 
class 


56 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Power  of  the 
bourgeoisie 


Increase  of 
population 
in  Great 
Britain 


got  control  of  the  governments  of  their  countries,  and  who 
presently  constituted  an  upper  caste  between  whom  and 
the  great  mass  of  wage-earners  and  employees  there 
was  in  the  end  almost  as  great  a  gulf  as  once  existed  be- 
tween lords  of  the  manor  and  villeins.  In  the  Middle 
Ages  aristocrats  and  the  strong  and  able  men  had  gone 
into  the  Church  and  risen  to  be  powerful  ecclesiastics,  or 
else  had  been  captains  in  the  wars,  or  noblemen  with 
castles,  men-at-arms,  and  manorial  rights  over  their 
fellows;  now  such  men  went  into  industry  or  commerce, 
and,  when  they  succeeded,  held  similar  power  as  a  result 
of  their  gold  and  their  factories  and  machines.  In  the 
course  of  the  nineteenth  century  in  many  places  they 
supplanted  the  power  of  kings  and  the  power  of  the  old 
nobility  completely.  "Our  epoch,"  said  Marx  and  Engels 
in  their  Communist  Manifesto  (1848),  is  "the  epoch  of  the 
bourgeoisie."  The  socialists  looked  upon  these  industrial 
and  financial  magnates  as  their  principal  opponents;  and 
in  the  twentieth  century  the  extreme  socialists,  the 
Bolsheviki  of  Russia,  assailed  them  as  the  arch-enemies  to 
be  overthrown  by  a  rising  of  the  proletariat,  the  mass  of 
the  workers. 

In  parts  of  western  Europe  a  great  increase  of  popula- 
tion followed  the  Industrial  Revolution.  The  inhabitants 
of  Europe  at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century 
have  been  estimated  at  175,000,000;  a  hundred  years  later 
the  population  was  400,000,000.  In  countries  like  Great 
Britain,  Belgium,  and  Germany  this  was  undoubtedly 
due  most  of  all  to  the  mighty  industrial  expansion.  In 
1801  the  population  of  Great  Britain  was  about  10,500,000; 
a  century  later  it  was  more  than  36,000,000.  During  that 
time  English  agriculture  diminished  relatively,  and  it 
would  have  been  impossible  to  feed  such  increasing 
multitudes  had  it  not  been  for  the  manufactured  goods 
which  paid  for  increasing  importations  of  food.  Three 
fourths  of  the  people  at  last  were  engaged  in  industry  and 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


57 


commerce.  In  the  earlier  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
attempt  had  been  made  to  maintain  English  agriculture 
by  protection,  but  after  tlie  tariffs  were  removed  with 
the  repeal  (1846)  of  the  Corn  Laws  it  had  to  endure 
competition  with  the  great  grain  fields  of  America  and 
Russia.  As  time  went  on,  farming  was  more  and  more 
abandoned,  and  the  ishmd  became  a  vast  industrial  hive. 
Increasingly  was  Britain  less  able  to  feed  her  growing 
population  except  with  food-stuffs  imported.  For  a  long 
time  she  could  do  tliis  easily  enough,  for  being  first  in  the 
field  she  found  markets  among  other  people  still  mostly 
engaged  in  agriculture,  and  she  had  besides  a  great  colonial 
empire  in  which  manufacturing  was  not  yet  established, 
and  from  which  raw  materials  were  easily  obtained.  In 
the  first  half  of  the  twentieth  century,  however,  it  was 
evident  that  each  country  desired  to  develop  its  o\mi 
manufactures  as  soon  as  it  could;  and  evidently  when 
this  came  to  pass  it  would  no  longer  be  so  easy  for  the 
older  industrial  communities,  lacking  local  agricultural 
support,  to  make  their  own  living. 

Similar  results  followed  in  the  German  countries,  es- 
pecially after  the  founding  of  the  German  Empire  (1871). 
In  1837  the  population  of  the  lands  later  on  contained  in 
this  empire  had  been  33,000,000;  by  1910  there  were 
65,000,000.  By  that  time  three  fifths  of  the  people  were 
engaged  in  manufacturing  and  trade;  agriculture  was 
no  longer  sufficient  to  support  the  population;  and  many 
of  the  people  really  got  their  living  by  making  manu- 
factured goods  to  be  exchanged  abroad  for  food.  But 
German  exporters  had  to  compete  in  a  field  already  largely 
taken  by  the  British,  which  was,  moreover,  slowly  dimin- 
ishing as  other  countries  were  establishing  their  industrial 
systems.  Furthermore,  the  Germans  had  no  great  colonial 
empire  in  which  to  exchange  manufactures  for  the  raw 
materials  needed.  The  difficulties  which  arose  thence 
probably    had    something   to    do    with    bringing   on    the 


Decline  of 
agriculture 


Increase  of 
population 
in  Germany 


58 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Relative  im- 
portance of 
districts 
changed 


The 
Netherlands 


Southern 
Europe 


Great  War,  in  which  Germany  struck  to  win  what  she 
did  not  have.  In  the  future,  countries  hke  Great  Britain 
and  Germany  will  have  more  difficulty  in  continuing  to 
expand  population  and  wealth,  so  far  as  such  expansion 
is  based  on  selling  manufactures  to  other  people  for  food. 

The  Industrial  Revolution  brought  about  a  shifting  of 
population  from  one  district  to  another,  and  brought  more 
rapid  growth  in  some  countries  than  in  others.  Down  to 
the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  rich  and  im- 
portant parts  of  England  had  always  been  the  east  and 
the  south,  containing  the  principal  seaports  and  the  best 
agricultural  lands.  After  1760  this  gradually  changed  until 
the  larger  number  of  people  lived  near  the  coal  and  the 
iron,  about  the  industrial  centers  of  the  west  and  the  north. 
Scotland,  poor  and  unimportant  until  she  was  admitted  to 
share  in  England's  trade  (1707),  became  very  prosperous 
after  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,  when  industrial 
life  developed  along  the  Clyde.  In  the  early  Middle 
Ages  Flanders  and  the  western  Netherlands  contained 
rich  cities  and  flourishing  small  manufactures,  but  when 
these  were  ruined  they  became  less  important  than  the 
northern  Netherlands  (Holland)  with  their  mighty  and 
prosperous  commerce.  But  after  the  estabUshment  of 
the  independence  of  the  Flemish  and  French  Netherlands 
as  the  Kingdom  of  Belgium  (1831),  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion brought  great  factories  and  huge  prosperity  based  on 
the  coal  and  iron  of  the  valley  of  the  Meuse,  and  Belgium 
went  forward  faster  than  Holland.  During  the  Middle 
Ages  southern  Europe  was  wealthier  and  more  important 
than  the  northern  part;  but  later  it  was  evident  that  the 
best  deposits  of  coal  and  iron  were  in  the  north,  and  the 
Industrial  Revolution  was  one  of  the  principal  factors 
in  making  the  north  so  much  more  powerful  and  rich. 
Until  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  France  con- 
tinued to  be  as  populous  as  Germany  and  stronger; 
but  after  that  time,  when  German  unity  was  accompanied 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


59 


by  mighty  industrial  growth,  Germany  went  forward  so 
much  more  rapidly  than  France  that  in  1914  she  had  half 
again  as  much  wealth  and  nearly  twice  the  population. 

Industrial  development  gradually  brought  great  changes 
in  military  strength,  which  were  beginning  to  be  apparent 
by  1870,  though  they  were  not  clearly  perceived  until 
long  after  that  time.  As  the  Industrial  Revolution  pro- 
gressed, machines  and  tools  got  to  be  so  much  more  power- 
ful and  complicated  that  an  alteration  took  place  not  gener- 
ally understood  before  1914-15.  By  that  time  the  power 
of  cannon  and  rapid-fire  guns  had  become  so  immeasurably 
great  that  there  was  an  enormous  disparity  between  men 
supplied  with  modern  death-dealing  instruments  and  the 
very  bravest  soldiers  not  so  equipped.  No  longer  did 
an  army  of  warlike  savages  have  any  chance  against 
a  few  soldiers  of  some  Great  Power.  A  nation's  military 
strength  was  no  longer  in  any  direct  proportion  to  the 
number  of  its  fighting  men,  but  altogether  to  the  size  of 
its  armies  equipped  with  modern  weapons  and  supplied 
with  the  ammunition  which  they  needed.  Only  the 
states  which  possessed  sufficient  iron  and  coal,  with 
developed  industrial  systems,  numerous  factories  and 
machines,  producing  immense  quantities  of  pig-iron,  to  be 
wrought  by  skilled  workmen  into  mighty  weapons  and 
various  implements,  could  hope  to  fight  a  great  war  suc- 
cessfully for  any  long  time.  In  1815  Russia  had  appeared 
a  colossus,  irresistible  if  her  myriads  were  capably  led; 
a  hundred  years  later  the  German  Empire  crushed  her 
with  all  her  millions,  completely.  She  had  then,  it  is  true, 
the  greatest  number  of  fighting-men  to  call  into  service, 
but  she  lacked  railroads,  factories,  trained  industrial 
workers,  and  she  was  unable  to  supply  the  material  of 
war.  The  industrial  strength  of  Germany  was  then  seen 
to  be  so  enormous  that  for  a  while  she  easily  defeated  all 
her  opponents.  The  Great  War  became  essentially  a  duel 
between  Germany  and  England,  the  two  principal  in- 


Industrial- 
ism  and  mili- 
tary strength 


Russia  and 
Germany 


60  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

dustrial  powers  of  Europe,  and  was  finally  decided  by  the 
entrance  of  the  United  States,  the  greatest  industrial  na- 
tion in  the  world. 
Urban  and  The  Revolution  involved  a  change  from  rural  to  city 

rxiral  life  jjf^  j^  many  parts  of  Europe,  and  brought  a  constantly 

greater  preponderance  of  town  over  country  life.  Down 
to  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  there  was  no  large 
community  in  Europe  in  which  the  great  majority  of  the 
people  did  not  make  their  living  by  agriculture  in  the  fields 
about  villages  in  the  country.  Afterward  in  countries 
like  Britain,  Belgium,  and  the  German  Empire,  where  in- 
dustrialism most  greatly  developed,  gradually  most  of  the 
people  were  to  be  found  in  cities  and  manufacturing 
districts.  In  the  civilized  countries  of  antiquity  city  life 
had  predominated  over  rural  life;  during  the  Middle  Ages 
power  based  on  the  land  was  all-important,  and  this  long 
continued  to  be  so;  but  during  the  course  of  the  nineteenth 
century  the  urban  communities  of  western  Europe  ac- 
quired greater  weight  than  the  country  districts.  "The 
bourgeoisie  has  subjected  the  country  to  the  rule  of  the 
to"WTis,"  said  the  Communist  Manifesto  in  1848. 
City  life  This  change  involved  much  progress  and  some  retro- 

gression. Great  numbers  of  people  were  thus  brought 
together  by  the  Industrial  Revolution,  and  mere  as- 
sociation gradually  gave  them  the  quicker,  more  open, 
more  radical  minds,  which  always  have  come  with  city 
life,  while  they  soon  discovered  the  power  of  numbers  and 
of  acting  together.  Hence  nothing  was  more  potent  than 
the  Industrial  Revolution  in  advancing  democracy,  self- 
government,  education,  the  emancipation  and  advance- 
ment of  women.  In  many  of  these  towns,  it  is  true, 
there  were  low  wages,  filthy  habitations,  undernourish- 
ment, and  degeneracy  of  body  and  mind.  But  these 
conditions  never  affected  all  the  workers,  and  as  time 
went  on  conditions  were  better.  On  the  other  hand,  as  the 
cities  became  larger,  many  of  their  inhabitants  were  almost 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


Gl 


cut  ofF  from  contact  with  the  soil,  and  removed  from 
knowledge  of  the  country,  from  which  their  forefathers  had 
developed  character  and  derived  their  princii)al  tlioughts. 
Accordingly,  many  of  the  inhabitants  acquired  a  new  way 
of  looking  at  things,  both  better  and  worse  than  the  old. 
It  was  also  true  that  the  artisans  and  workers  of  the  towns 
were  soon  mentally  more  alert,  more  apt  to  question 
existing  conditions,  better  able  to  conceive  of  changes, 
more  insistent  in  demanding  that  changes  be  made, 
and  more  powerful  in  bringing  them  about.  It  had 
ever  been  so.  The  most  brilliant  civilization  of  an- 
tiquity arose  in  the  cities;  in  after  times  the  great  re- 
forms in  Europe  began  in  the  towns. 

During  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  ideas 
once  formulated  in  England,  then  more  grandly  stated 
in  France,  then  worked  out  through  the  American  and 
the  French  Revolutions,  were  gradually  followed  by  the 
masses  in  western  Europe.  Especially  in  the  towns  arose 
demand  for  revision  of  the  franchise  and  extension  to  the 
workers  of  some  share  in  governing  the  state.  In  course 
of  time  in  Great  Britain,  in  France,  in  Italy,  and  in  Bel- 
gium, and  to  a  less  extent  in  the  German  states,  working- 
men  and  rural  laborers  were  admitted  to  the  franchise, 
and  in  time  tended  to  secure  control.  They  themselves  and 
the  classes  above  them  saw  that  this  power  could  not  be 
wisely  used  unless  they  had  education,  which  already  the 
townspeople  were  more  and  more  desiring  to  have.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  the  nineteenth  century  for  the  first  time  in 
the  history  of  mankind,  it  became  one  of  the  great  pur- 
poses to  see  that  all  men  and  women  should  be  able  to 
read  and  write.  By  no  means  had  this  been  completely 
accomplished  by  1870,  nor  is  it  yet,  save  in  the  most  ad- 
vanced and  prosperous  countries  of  the  world.  But  in 
those  lands  where  most  of  the  people  had  gradually 
got  some  education  and  some  political  experience,  more 
and  more  were  they  demanding  reforms  in   the  govern- 


New  en- 
vironment 


Results  of 

urban 

growth 


62 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  position 
of  women 


Christianity 
and  woman 


ment,  and  other  reforms  which  would  make  their  lives 
happier  and  better. 

In  consequence  of  the  Industrial  Revolution,  probably, 
more   than   anything  else,   the   position   of   women   was 
changed  profoundly.     By   1870  there  had  already  been 
alteration  in  their  status  in  some  countries,  though  much 
larger  results  would  be  more  evident  fifty  years  later.     The 
nineteenth  century  was  the  era  of  great  change  in  the 
history  of  women.     The  great  movements  of  the  past, 
the    Renaissance,    the    Reformation,    even    the    French 
Revolution,  which  carried  many  men  so  far  forward,  left 
w^omen  much  as  they  had  been,  inferior  and  subordinate 
to  men.     Among  savage  and  barbarous  peoples,  in  primi- 
tive  times,   though   occasionally   women   had   possessed 
political  power  and  were  held  in  high  respect,  they  were 
generally  obliged  to  do  most  of  the  work.     Among  the 
earlier  civilized  peoples  they  had  usually  been  the  servants 
and  chattels  of  men,  though  under  the  Roman  Empire 
law  and  custom  gradually  gave  them  the  highest  position 
held  by  women  before  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century.     Christianity,  since  it  made  people  gentler  and 
more  kindly,  affected  women's  lot  in  many  ways  for  the 
better,  yet  it  assisted  in  keeping  them  in  lower  position 
than  men.     Through  the  first  woman,  it  was  said,  came 
sin;  and,  from  her,  death  and  the  fall  of  man.     The  curse 
of  Eve  was  on  all  women:  they  were  less  than  men;  they 
should  be  obedient  to  their  husbands.     Accordingly,  the 
Church  had  given  them  an  honorable  but  inferior  position, 
though  this  was  counterbalanced  by  veneration  of  the 
mother  of  Christ.     The  monks  and  the  hermits,  at  one 
time  so  powerful,  taught  that  women  were  sinful  creatures 
to  be  avoided.    Through  all  these  ages  down  to  recent  times 
certain  circumstances  pertaining  to  women  combined  with 
prevailing  conditions  of  society  to  influence  ideas  about 
them.     They   were  less  strong  than   men:  they  needed 
men's  protection;  this  was  purchased  by  obedience  and 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION 


G3 


submission.  Down  to  the  time  of  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion most  of  women's  work  was  always  done  in  the  home, 
under  the  control  and  supervision  of  men,  whose  authority 
was  recognized  by  law.  It  was  not  often  possible  for  an 
unmarried  woman  to  have  a  business  of  her  own,  or  find 
work  outside  the  home;  and  there  she  worked  under  the 
direction  of  some  male  relative  or  some  man  who  gave  her 
support.  Englishmen  believed  that  their  women  were 
better  off  than  those  of  any  other  country,  but  in  Eng- 
land unmarried  women  had  a  legal  position  less  good  than 
men's,  while  married  women,  the  great  majority  of  the 
sex,  had  no  legal  existence  separate  from  the  husbands',  of 
whom  they  were  considered  a  part.  The  husband  was 
responsible  for  the  wife,  and  had  entire  authority  over  her. 
At  the  time  of  marriage  the  husband  became  owner  of 
the  wife's  property,  and  when  children  were  born  they 
were  legally  his.  Generally  women  were  not  supposed  to 
possess  any  learning  except  what  pertained  to  home 
duties.  They  were  advised  not  to  display  such  education 
as  they  had,  since  learning  in  women  was  thought  un- 
womanly and  improper,  and  apt  to  be  disliked  by  the  men. 
Generally  families  were  larger  then  than  now,  and  a  great 
part  of  all  the  mental  and  physical  energy  of  most  women 
was  given  to  the  bearing  and  raising  of  children. 

From  time  immemorial  had  these  things  been,  but  now 
a  great  transformation  was  taking  place.  Many  things 
contributed  to  effect  this  change.  The  grand  ideas  of  the 
French  Revolution  were  gradually  considered  to  pertain 
to  women  as  well  as  to  men.  In  the  nineteenth  century 
several  causes  brought  it  about  that  greater  sympathy  and 
humanitarianism  developed  than  ever  before.  The  rapid 
advance  of  men  was  being  shared  by  women.  "Unless 
women  are  raised  to  the  level  of  men,  men  will  be  pulled 
down  to  theirs,"  said  John  Stuart  Mill  in  1866.  In  course  of 
time  women  as  well  as  men  obtained  education,  and  from 
it  came  deepening  of  intellect  and  broadening  of  mind, 


Subordina- 
tion to  men 


Betterment 
of  women's 
position 


64 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Some 
economic 
independ- 
ence 


Greater  pro- 
duction and 
more  leisure 


greater  sense  of  dignity  and  worth,  and  inevitably  larger 
power.  Finally,  as  a  result  of  the  Industrial  Revolution, 
much  of  the  work  formerly  done  in  the  home — spinning, 
weaving,  making  clothes,  preserving  food,  and  even  pre- 
paring it  to  be  eaten — was  taken  away  to  be  done  by  factory 
workers.  To  the  factories  women  followed  this  work,  of 
which  previously  the  larger  part  had  always  been  done 
by  themselves;  and  there  they  worked  for  wages,  which, 
after  a  while,  they  kept  and  considered  as  their  own.  In 
this  way  came  the  beginning  of  some  economic  independ- 
ence. Furthermore,  the  Industrial  Revolution,  as  will 
be  shown,  made  possible  a  larger  amount  of  leisure  than 
ever  before,  especially  for  women.  The  greater  material 
prosperity  and  the  higher  standard  of  living  in  conse- 
quence often  brought  it  about  that  families  were  smaller 
than  before.  By  1870  women  were  at  the  threshold  of  a 
new  era,  which  in  some  respects  would  be  preeminently 
a  Woman's  Age. 

Finally  the  industrial  changes  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury created  a  different  standard  of  living  and  a  higher 
material  civilization  for  a  great  many  people.  In  earlier 
times  there  had  often  been  much  comfortable,  even 
splendid,  living,  with  a  great  deal  of  beauty  and  grace; 
but  most  of  the  population  had  no  share  in  it,  and  never 
could  hope  to  have.  There  were  then  wanting  many 
things  now  taken  as  a  matter  of  course.  However  much 
most  people  strove  they  could  not  hope  to  get  a  large 
amount  of  such  things  as  then  existed,  for  working  alone 
in  their  homes,  with  hands  or  simple  appliances,  without 
machinery,  with  little  cooperation  and  division  of  labor, 
it  was  not  possible  ever  to  produce  much  more  than  was 
needed  by  most  people  for  mere  subsistence.  So  it  had 
been  in  ancient  times,  when  only  a  minority  enjoyed  luxury 
and  fine  li\nng  through  the  labor  of  a  multitude  of  slaves. 
So  it  was  through  medieval  and  modern  times,  when  only 
the  aristocracy  and  a  few  prosperous  people  had  these 


INDUSTRIAL    REVOLUTION         G5 

things.     But  with  the  coming  of  the  great  factories  and     Moreneces- 
machines  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  it  was  possible  to     saries  and 
produce  easily  much  greater  quantities  of  things  than  had     J^fngg^p^ro- 
ever  been  obtained  before,  so  that  more  people  might  have     duced 
them;  and  this  increased  production  had  to  do  also  with 
many  new  articles  which  were  now  invented.     Accord- 
ingly, while  at  first  numerous  laborers  were  thrown  out  of 
work,  and  while  the  condition  of  the  workers  was  often 
very  bad,  yet  it  was  presently  evident  that  the  new  system 
yielded  far  greater  output,  and  that  now  the  mass  of  the 
people  might  get  things  formerly  possessed  only  by  the 
wealthy.     Furthermore,  the  machines  doing  the  work  of 
many  men  made  it  possible  for  an  increasing  number  of 
people  to  work  less  for  the  obtaining  of  what  they  wanted, 
with  the  result  that  leisure,  time  free  from  the  toil  neces- 
sary for  existence,  became  the  possession  of  a  larger  number 
of  people  than  ever  before.     This  leisure  was  devoted  by 
some  of  the  fortunate  to  improving  their  education  and  still 
further  advancing  their  civilization. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

For  the  great  inventions  and  changes:  A.  R.  Wallace,  The 
Wonderful  Century:  Its  Successes  and  Its  Failures  (1898),  a  very 
stimulating  brief  account,  The  Progress  of  the  Century  (1901), 
by  the  same  author  and  many  others.  Also  James  Samuelson 
(editor),  The  Civilisation  of  Our  Day  (1896),  containing  essays 
by  various  specialists;  E.  W.  Byrn,  The  Progress  of  Invention 
in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1900). 

For  the  history  of  industry  and  the  old  systems  in  general: 
Johannes  Conrad,  Ilandworterbuch  der  Slaats^wissenschaft,  8  vols. 
(3d  ed.  1909-11);  R.  H.  I.  Palgrave,  Dictionary  of  Political 
Economy,  3  vols.  (1910-13);  Benjamin  Rand,  Selections  Illustrat- 
ing Economic  History  Since  the  Seven  Years"  War  (5th  ed.  1911). 
Also  W.  W.  Cunningham,  The  Growth  of  English  Industry  and 
Commerce  in  Modern  Times,  3  vols.  (5th  ed.  1910-12). 

The  Industrial  Revolution:  D.  H.  Macgregor,  The  Evol  ition 
of  Industry  (1912);  H.  de  B.  Gibbins,  Economic  and  Industrial 
Progress  of  the  Century  (1903)    excellent;  Paul   Mantoux,   La 


66  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Eevohdion  Industrielle  au  XVIW  Steele  (1906),  best  account  of 
tlie  Industrial  Revolution. 

In  England:  G.  H.  Ferris,  The  Industrial  History  of  Modern 
England  (1914);  Arnold  Toynbee,  Lectures  on  the  Industrial 
Revolution  of  the  18th  Century  in  England  (1884),  the  classic 
exposition  in  English;  A.  P.  Usher,  An  Introduction  to  the  Indus- 
trial History  of  England  (1920);  G.  T.  Warner,  Landmarks  in 
English  Industrial  History  (11th  ed.  1912). 

The  new  system:  J.  A.  Hobson,  The  Evolution  of  Modern 
Capitalism:  a  Study  of  Machine  Production  (ed.  1912),  excellent; 
Charles  Gide  and  Charles  Rist,  Histoire  des  Doctrines  Economi- 
ques  depuis  les  Physiocrates  jusqua  Nos  Jours  (1919),  trans. 
A  History  of  Economic  Doctrines  (1915);  Werner  Sombart,  Der 
Moderne  Capitalismus,  2  vols.  (1902). 

Condition  and  progress  of  the  laboring  classes :  Louis  Blanc, 
Histoire  des  Dix  Ans,  1830-18^0,  trans.  History  of  Ten  Years, 
1830-1840,  2  vols.  (1844-5);  Friedrich  Engels,  The  Condition  of 
the  Working  Class  in  England  in  18U  (ed.  1892);  Octave  Festy, 
Le  Mouvement  Ouvrier  au  DSbut  de  la  Monarchic  de  Juillet,  2  vols. 
(1908);  R.  G.  Gammage,  History  of  Chartism  (1854,  new  ed. 
1894),  the  author  was  a  leader  in  the  movement;  Mark  Ho  veil. 
The  Chartist  Movement  (1918),  the  best  account;  E.  Levasseur, 
Histoire  des  Classes  Ouvrier es  et  de  V Industrie  en  France  de  1789 
a  1870,  2  vols.  (1903);  J.  A.  R.  Marriott,  editor.  The  French 
Revolution  in  184-8  in  Its  Economic  Aspects,  2  vols.  (1913); 
James  Mavor,  An  Economic  History  of  Russia,  2  vols.  (1914). 


CHAPTER  IV 

CERTAIN    INTELLECTUAL    AND 
SOCIAL   CHANGES 

Everybody  has  read  Mr.  Darwin's  book  .  .  .  pietists  .  .  . 
decry  it  .  .  .  bigots  denounce  it  with  ignorant  invective; 
old  ladies  of  both  sexes  consider  it  a  decidedly  dangerous  book,  and 
even  savants  .  .  .  quote  antiquated  writers  to  show  tliat  its 
author  is  no  better  than  an  ape  himself.  .  .  . 
T.  H.  Huxley,  "The  Origin  of  the  Species"  (1860). 

In  England  ist  der  Umwalzungsprocess  mit  Handen  greifbar     .     . 
in  Deutschland,  Frankreich,  kurz  alien  Kulturstaaten  des  europa- 
ischen  Kontinents,  eine  Umwandlung  der  bestehenden  Verhaltnisse 
von  Kapital  und  Arbeit  ebenso  f  lihlbar  und  ebenso  unvermeidlich 
ist  als  in  England. 
Karl  Marx,  preface  to  Das  Kapital  (1867). 

Romanum  pontificem,  cum  ex  cathedra  loquitur,  id  est,  cum  omnium 
christianorum  pastoris  et  doctoris  munere  fungens  pro  suprema  sua 
apostolica  auctoritate  doctrinam  de  fide  vel  moribus  ab  universa 
ecclesia  tenendam  definit,  per  assistentiam  divinam,  ipsi  in  beato 
Petro  promissam,  ea  infallibilitate  poUere,  qua  divinus  redemptor 
ecclesiam  suam  in  definienda  doctrina  de  fide  vel  moribus  instruc- 
tam  esse  voluit. 

Concilium    Vaticanttm:     "De    Romani    pontificis    infallibili 
magisterio"   (July  18,  1870). 

During  the  hundred  years  or  more  from  the  middle  intellectual 
of  the  eighteenth  century  great  changes  took  place  which  changes 
profoundly  altered  men's  ideas  about  themselves,  about 
the  world  around  them,  their  conception  of  the  Church, 
of  the  State,  of  the  relations  of  men  one  with  another,  and 
of  the  organization  of  society;  so  that  by  1870,  and  es- 
pecially in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century,  a 
vast  alteration  was  apparent.  During  this  time  came 
not  only  the  French  Revolution  and  the  Industrial  Revo- 

67 


68 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


New 
conditions 


The  uni- 
verse 


Changing 
conceptions 
of  the 
cosmos 


lution,  but  from  them  socialism  took  its  rise,  while  the 
doctrine  of  evolution  and  the  spread  of  scientific  thinking 
brought  large  change  in  methods  of  thought  and  in  intel- 
lectual outlook. 

The  new  inventions  and  the  new  industrial  organization 
were  making  it  possible  to  produce  more  of  the  necessaries 
and  of  the  desirable  things  of  life  than  in  the  past,  with 
much  less  of  human  labor.  Gradually  a  considerable 
part  of  all  the  population  had  more  time  to  spare  from 
work  to  devote  to  the  enjoyment  of  life  and  the  considera- 
tion of  various  things.  Hence  it  was  possible  for  more 
people  than  previously  to  be  aware  of  intellectual  changes, 
and  by  them  to  be  more  affected. 

During  this  period  came  completely  altered  conception 
of  mankind  and  the  world,  of  their  origin,  their  progress, 
and  their  development.  For  a  long  time  before,  indeed, 
had  such  a  change  been  in  progress.  After  the  second 
century  of  the  Christian  Era  it  had  generally  been  con- 
sidered that  the  earth  was  the  center  of  the  universe. 
Above  were  the  heavens,  containing  sun,  moon,  and 
stars,  relatively  small  and  in  the  firmament  at  no  great 
distance  above  the  earth.  In  accordance  with  this  con- 
ception Dante  in  the  Divina  Commedia  explained  the 
position  of  heaven,  purgatory,  and  hell,  and  thus  even 
Milton  during  the  seventeenth  century,  in  his  Paradise 
Lost,  conceived  the  structure  and  parts  of  the  universe. 
According  to  this  belief  the  sun,  the  moon,  and  the  stars 
were  all  considered  relatively  unimportant  and  sub- 
sidiary to  the  earth.  The  world  and  mankind  therein 
were  the  center  of  things,  the  beginning  and  end  of  creation. 

A  change  began  when  Copernicus,  a  Prussian,  in  1543 
published  his  book,  De  orhium  ca^lestium  revolutionihus 
(concerning  the  movements  of  the  heavenly  bodies),  in 
which  he  asserted  that  the  sun  was  the  center  of  the 
universe,  and  the  earth  only  one  of  the  bodies  which 
revolved  about  it.     At  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth 


4.     EUROPE:  SHOWING  RATLROAl 


CANALS,  ASD  PRINCIPAL  RIVERS 


CHANGES 


69 


century  his  teachings  were  confirmed  and  extended  by  the 
German,  Kepler,  and  slowly  the  results  were  accepted. 
When  this  took  place  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  attach 
either  to  men  or  their  world  such  immense  importance  as 
before.  During  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries 
conceptions  of  the  universe  altered  still  more  with  the  pro- 
gress of  astronomy  and  other  sciences.  Mathematics  was 
developed,  delicate  instruments  were  perfected,  telescopes 
became  ever  more  powerful,  and  spectrum  analysis  was 
brought  into  service,  with  the  result  that  further  discover- 
ies were  made  which  more  completely  altered  ideas.  At 
the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  men  thought  of  the  sun 
as  the  center  of  a  universe,  with  planets  and  attendant 
satellites  revolving  about  it,  and  so  vast  was  this  universe 
that  the  outermost  planet,  Neptune,  revolved  at  a  distance 
of  2,800,000,000  miles.  Slowly  during  the  nineteenth 
century  was  knowledge  of  the  heavens  advanced,  until 
this  solar  universe  seemed  small  and  but  a  little  part  of 
all  things.  By  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century 
distances  had  become  so  vast  that  they  were  measured 
now  only  by  the  "light  year,"  the  distance  that  light, 
travelling  186,000  miles  a  second,  would  traverse  in  a 
year.  From  the  earth  to  the  sun,  light  would  go  in  eight 
minutes,  but  it  would  take  four  years  for  the  passage  to  the 
nearest  fixed  star,  and  myriads  or  millions  of  years  to 
reach  another  nebula  like  the  INIilky  Way,  of  which  perhaps 
the  sun  and  its  system  are  a  part. 

Along  with  this  idea  of  the  diminishing  importance 
of  the  earth  came  another  great  change  in  thought.  In 
early  times,  and  especially  since  the  rise  of  Christianity, 
it  had  been  taught  that  the  heavens  and  the  earth  and  all 
the  things  they  contained  were  created  by  God  in  six  daj's; 
and  it  was  believed  that  as  they  had  suddenly  been  made 
in  the  beginning,  so  they  had  continued,  essentially 
unchanged.  Things  had  been  designed  for  a  purpose; 
that  purpose  continued  to  be.     Men  and  women  must 


The  earth 
smaller,  not 
the  center 
of  things 


Creation 


70 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


accept  the  conditions  around  them  by  which  they  were 
ruled.  "In  the  beginning,"  said  the  Genesis  of  Scrip- 
tures, "God  created  the  heaven  and  the  earth  .  .  . 
man  in  his  own  image.  .  .  .  Thus  the  heavens  and 
the  earth  were  finished."  Literal  belief  in  these  precepts 
was  fundamental.  Many  a  reader  of  the  Bible  studied 
the  chronology  which  it  contained,  laboriously  estimating 
the  years  which  had  elapsed  since  Creation.  About  the 
middle  of  the  seventeenth  century  Archbishop  Usher,  of 
the  Anglican  Church  in  Ireland,  declared  that  Creation  had 
taken  place  4,004  years  before  the  birth  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Thus,  according  to  current  ideas,  the  life  of  man  and  of 
the  world  was  but  short,  just  as  the  universe  was  little. 
Altered  These  conceptions  also  were  changed  for  many  people 

conception  during  the  course  of  the  nineteenth  century  by  the  ad- 
vance of  science  and  the  formulation  of  the  doctrine  of 
evolution  until  it  became  increasingly  doubtful  to  many 
whether  the  universe  and  all  it  contained  had  been  made 
suddenly  and  primarily  with  reference  to  man.  The 
very  idea  of  creation,  or  a  sudden  making  of  things,  was 
slowly  displaced  by  the  belief  that  things  had  evolved  out 
of  other  things  slowly,  through  long  process  of  time. 
Evolution  The  doctrine  of  evolution  was  not  new,  for  it  went  back 

at  least  to  the  time  of  some  of  the  Greek  philosophers, 
from  whom  it  had  been  taken  to  be  grandly  stated  by 
Lucretius  in  his  De  Natura  Rerum.  In  1749  the  great 
French  naturalist,  Buffon,  began  the  publication  of  his 
Histoire  Naturelle,  in  which  he  declared  that  environment 
altered  animals,  and  suggested  that  both  men  and  apes 
might  have  developed  from  a  common  ancestor  long  be- 
fore. At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  James  Hutton, 
a  Scottish  geologist,  showed  how  changes  in  the  earth's 
surface  had  been  made,  and  declared  that  he  could  "find 
no  traces  of  a  beginning,  no  prospect  of  an  end. "  About 
this  time  also  the  doctrine  of  development  and  slow  change 
was  advanced  by  the  French  astronomer  and  mathema- 


CHANGES 


71 


tician,  Laplace,  who  undertook  in  liis  Nebular  Hypothesis 
to  explain  the  development  of  the  solar  system. 

It  was  in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century,  how- 
ever, that  contributions  were  made  which  caused  the 
doctrine  to  revolutionize  thinking.  In  1830  Sir  Charles 
Lyell  began  the  publication  of  his  Principles  of  Geology, 
in  which  he  showed  how  earth  features  had  developed 
and  were  everywhere  developing  still.  Later  on  he  de- 
clared that  remains  of  primitive  man  were  found  under 
some  of  the  later  strata  of  the  earth's  surface,  and  esti- 
mated that  men  had  lived  in  the  world  for  50,000  or 
100,000  years.  Later  authorities  believed  that  man 
might  have  existed  for  1,000,000  years,  and  that  the 
years  of  the  age  of  the  earth  might  be  200,000,000. 

Most  important  of  all,  however,  was  the  work  of  the 
English  naturalist,  Charles  Darwin.  Influenced  by  Lyell's 
teaching  of  slow  development,  and  also  by  the  doctrine 
of  the  English  economist  Malthus,  that  increase  of  living 
things  depended  on  their  supply  of  food,  he  made  a  long 
and  careful  study  of  animals  and  plants.  In  1859  he 
published  his  work,  On  the  Origin  of  Species  by  Means 
of  Natural  Selection,  and  twelve  years  later  his  other  work, 
The  Descent  of  Man.  In  these  WTitings  he  taught  that  there 
had  been  a  long,  slow  development  of  things,  an  evolution 
of  one  type  from  another;  that  the  changes  in  this  evolution 
had  been  brought  about  as  the  result  of  a  struggle  for 
survival,  in  which  some  individuals  or  species  had  sur- 
vived because  of  peculiarities  which  especially  fitted  them 
to  succeed  or  survive,  and  that  these  peculiarities  increas- 
ing in  course  of  time  had  constituted  the  changes  of 
evolution,  and  brought  about  variation  of  species.  There 
had  been  a  long  descent  of  species  in  which  man  could  be 
traced  back  through  the  ape  families  to  lower  forms  more 
distant  and  remote  in  time.  Meanwhile,  a  younger  scien- 
tist, A.  R.  Wallace,  had  independently  reached  the  same 
conclusions. 


Geology: 
Lyell 


Darwin : 

natural 
science 


72 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


spread  of 
the  doctrine 
of  evolution 


Evolution 
and 

religion 


The  sober  writings  of  Darwin,  from  the  nature  of  their 
substance  very  difficult  to  comprehend,  could  have  no 
wide  circle  of  understanding  readers,  but  in  consequence 
of  his  work  the  idea  of  evolution  attracted  great  attention. 
Among  English-speaking  people  it  was  expounded  by 
Thomas  Huxlej^  with  such  brilliancy  and  complete  clear- 
ness that  the  educated  layman  understood  it.  Presently 
the  doctrine  became  the  most  important  new  intellectual 
force  of  the  time.  Herbert  Spencer  in  England  undertook 
to  explain  all  branches  of  knowledge  in  terms  of  evolution. 
By  1870  a  bitter  controversy  was  raging,  in  which  clergy- 
men and  conservatives  heaped  upon  the  hypothesis  their 
obloquy,  denunciation,  and  ridicule.  In  course  of  time, 
however,  it  was  generally  accepted  among  educated  peo- 
ple, and  though  afterward  modified  in  important  particu- 
lars, it  was  in  the  end  recognized  as  one  of  the  very  bases 
of  modern  thought. 

The  results  of  all  this  were  enormous.  The  conceptions 
of  scholars  and  learned  men  were  fundamentally  changed, 
and  religious  ideas  soon  affected.  The  Bible  had  seemed 
to  make  it  certain  that  the  earth  was  created  in  six  days; 
now  geologists  were  teaching  that  the  world  had  been 
slowly  evolving  for  100,000,000  years.  Hitherto  most 
people  had  believed  that  man  had  existed  for  about  6,000 
years;  now  geologists  asserted  that  he  had  been  on  the 
earth  for  more  than  100,000.  For  ages  had  it  been  taught 
that  "God  created  man  in  his  own  image,  in  the  image  of 
God  created  he  him";  now  many  declared  that  human 
beings  had  gradually  been  evolved  from  lower  animals, 
these  from  reptiles,  they  from  fishes,  and  so  on  back  to 
the  lowest  forms  in  primeval  times.  It  was  therefore 
a  generation  of  unhappiness  and  stress  to  many  pious  and 
thoughtful  people,  who  were  yet  struck  by  the  apparent 
truth  of  the  new  assertions  which  were  being  taught; 
they  felt  that  the  basis  of  their  faith  was  being  shaken 
since  they  had  taken  all  the  Bible  as  inspired  and  all  its 


CHANGES 


73 


contents  to  be  literally  true.  By  1870  a  painful  conflict 
was  going  on  between  science  and  religion,  which  con- 
tinued long  after.  In  this  conflict  evolutionists  and  men 
of  science  were  held  up  as  atheists  and  blasphemers,  while 
they  heaped  scorn  on  the  ignorance  of  their  opponents. 
As  the  century  slowly  progressed  many  people  were  able 
to  adjust  their  beliefs  and  modify  their  conceptions,  so 
that  religion  and  science  were  reconciled  for  them. 

Meanwhile,  innovation  no  less  profound  was  taking  place 
concerning  ideas  of  social  and  economic  arrangement. 
To  the  humane  French  philosophers  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  eighteenth  century  the  world  had  seemed  full  of 
abuses,  and  they  had  stated  the  means  by  which  men 
could  be  given  their  natural  equality  and  the  happiness 
which  ought  to  be  their  due;  these  doctrines  had  been  re- 
stated in  the  French  Revolution,  and  attempt  made  to 
carry  them  into  effect.  Hence  had  come  civil  equality. 
But  the  radical  reformers  of  the  Revolution  had  clearly 
perceived  that  the  better  state  which  they  hoped  for  could 
never  be  attained  unless  economic  equality  came  also. 
Presently  the  effects  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  were 
apparent,  and  economic  inequalities  appeared  still  more 
striking.  To  remedy  these  conditions  old  doctrines  were 
restated  so  strikingly  that  they  have  never  since  failed  of 
attention. 

The  ideas  now  known  as  socialism  did  not  originate  in 
the  nineteenth  century,  but  in  some  form  can  be  traced 
back  very  far.  Plato,  who  perceived  the  inequalities  of 
his  time,  and  who  declared  that  in  every  city  there  were 
two  great  groups,  the  few  who  had,  and  the  many  who  did 
not  have,  always  at  war  with  each  other,  described  in  his 
Republic  an  ideal  state  in  which  there  should  be  community 
of  goods  and  all  fare  alike.  Others  before  him  had  dreamed 
of  this,  and  the  idea  was  handed  on  down.  ^Yhen  Chris- 
tianity was  established  something  of  communism  was 
adopted.     "  If  thou  wilt  be  perfect,"  said  Jesus  to  a  certain 


Socialism 


Communist 
ideas  in 
earlier  times 


74 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


In  the 
Church 


Communism 
in  the 
French 
Revolution 


one,  "go  and  sell  that  thou  hast,  and  give  to  the  poor.'* 
Holding  of  property  in  common  for  all  the  members  came 
to  be  the  rule  of  organization  in  the  early  Church  as  it 
was  in  the  later  monastic  societies;  but  as  time  went  on  it 
was  not  retained  in  the  general  organization  of  the  Catholic 
Church.     In  1360  John  Ball  and  others  preached  to  Eng- 
hsh  villeins  that  in  the  beginning  all  men  were  equal  and 
that  serfdom  ought  to  be  abolished.     The  doctrine  of 
communism  was  again  memorably  stated  in  the  sixteenth 
century  by  the  Englishman,  Sir  Thomas  More,  who  de- 
scribed the  blessed  country  of  Utopia  where  community  of 
goods  prevailed.     During  the  period  of  the  Reformation 
there   was   some   attempt   to   realize   this,    especially   in 
places  where  the  Anabaptists  were  in  control.     During  the 
seventeenth  century  in  England  certain  Levellers  arose 
to  preach  that  all  men  should  have  equal  position.     In  the 
eighteenth  century  French  philosophic  writers  again  ex- 
pounded the  doctrine.     In  1748  Montesquieu  recalled  the 
communism  of  the  Republic  of  Plato,  declared  that  the 
rich  obtained  their  wealth  by  taking  from  others,  suggested 
that  the  State  should  divide  great  fortunes,  and  asserted 
that  in  return  for  their  labor  the  State  owed  food,  cloth- 
ing, and  a  healthful  living  to  all  of  its  citizens.     Rousseau, 
who  learned  much   from  Montesquieu,   asserted  in  his 
Discourse  Concerning  Inequality  among  Men  (1754)  that  in 
the  state  of  nature,  before  the  time  of  private  property, 
all  men  were  free  and  held  the  property  in  common. 

In  the  French  Revolution  the  disciples  of  Rousseau  and 
his  fellows,  both  Girondins  and  Jacobins,  held  similar  ideas; 
and,  though  these  ideas  had  almost  no  actual  result,  yet 
during  the  most  extreme  part  of  the  Revolution  some  at- 
tempt was  made  to  put  them  into  effect.  One  of  the 
Girondists  asserted  that  equality  would  come  only  if 
fortunes  were  equally  divided  by  law,  and  if  laws  were 
passed  to  prevent  inequalities  in  the  future.  In  1792 
Robespierre  declared  that  property  held  in  common  by  all 


CHANGES 


75 


of  society  was  indispensable.  "The  French  Revolution," 
said  Sylvain  IMarechal  in  1796,  in  his  Manijcste  de.s  Kgaux 
(Proclamation  of  Equals),  "is  but  the  forerunner  of  an- 
other revolution  much  greater  .  .  .  which  will  be 
the  last  .  .  .  we  move  forward  to  something  more 
sublime  and  just,  the  common  weal  and  comnmnily  of 
goods.  No  more  private  ownership  of  land,  the  land  be- 
longs to  no  one."  By  this  time  reaction  was  already 
under  way,  and  the  bourgeois  Directory  was  in  control. 
Against  this  government  Babeuf,  who  had  asserted  belief 
in  complete  equality  and  community  of  property,  headed 
a  conspiracy  in  1796.  His  scheme,  which  at  once  came 
to  naught  with  his  capture  and  execution,  had  been  the 
establishment  of  a  state  in  which  private  property  should 
not  exist,  and  in  which  the  commonwealth,  holding  all 
property,  should  direct  all  the  work  of  its  citizens,  dividing 
their  tasks  among  them,  and,  if  necessary,  compelling  men 
to  do  the  work  assigned.  Actually,  the  course  of  the 
Revolution  brought  it  about  that  private  property  in 
France  presently  came  to  be  divided  among  a  larger  num- 
ber of  proprietors  than  before.  From  France  communistic 
doctrines  had  spread  over  into  England,  but  no  substantial 
results  were  apparent. 

For  the  most  part  the  communistic  theories  of  the  Old 
Regime  and  the  Revolution  had  to  do  with  landed  prop- 
erty, but  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century 
the  Industrial  Revolution  produced  in  western  Europe 
such  large  results,  such  power  and  wealth  in  the  hands  of 
capitahsts  and  factory  owners,  and  made  so  evident  the 
lowly  dependence  of  a  multitude  of  workers,  that  again  the 
ideas  of  better  arrangement  of  wealth  and  of  regulation 
by  the  State  were  taken  up.  They  were  directed  now 
more  against  the  bourgeoisie.  In  France  the  sale  on  easy 
terms  to  the  peasants  of  the  lands  of  the  nobles  and  the 
Church  was  bringing  to  the  mass  of  the  people  better 
chance  than  the  people  of  any  nation  ever  before  had  had. 


Economic 
equality 
by  law 


The  In- 
dustrial 
Revolution 


76 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Socialism  in 
England 


In  France 


But  in  Great  Britain,  and  also  in  lands  near  by,  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution  was  now  creating  a  new  proletariat, 
for  whom  other  measures  were  needed. 

In  England,  where  industrial  change  had  been  greatest, 
came  the  first  important  development  in  this  period. 
Early  in  the  nineteenth  century  Robert  Owen,  a  Scotch- 
man, developed  at  New  Lanark  a  model  factory  com- 
munity, where  the  workers  shared  in  the  profits  of  their 
labors.  He  believed  that  it  would  be  possible  for  in- 
dustrial and  agricultural  life  everywhere  to  be  so  arranged. 
The  enterprise  at  New  Lanark  was  very  successful,  but 
attempts  to  set  up  similar  communities  elsewhere  usually 
failed.  It  was  generally  found  that  a  leader  with  the 
enterprise  and  the  skill  necessary  to  win  such  success 
would  only  work  for  himself,  while  the  workers,  much 
pleased  to  share  in  the  profits,  were  unwilling  or  unable 
to  assume  any  part  of  the  losses.  Later  on,  however, 
cooperative  enterprises  and  stores  were  established,  not 
only  in  Great  Britain  but  elsewhere.  Owen  himself  went 
beyond  his  undertaking  at  New  Lanark,  constantly  inter- 
esting himself  in  assisting  the  poorer  classes  and  reforming 
society.  He  tried  to  establish  various  communities  in 
which  property  and  interests  should  be  in  common.  He 
was  afterward  regarded  as  the  founder  of  socialism  in 
England.  Indeed,  it  was  in  connection  with  his  efforts 
that  the  term  "socialism"  arose.  He  himself  may  have 
employed  it,  but  as  early  as  1835  one  of  his  disciples  is 
known  to  have  used  the  word  "socialist"  {socius,  comrade 
or  ally).  In  the  following  years  socialism  permeated  the 
ideals  of  the  Chartist  reformers,  but  died  down  with  the 
failure  of  their  schemes. 

During  this  time  the  Industrial  Revolution  was  develop- 
ing also  in  France,  where  factories,  slums,  proletariat,  all 
attracted  increasing  attention.  Thoughtful  and  humane 
men  began  to  advocate  fundamental  reform,  going  back 
to  the  ideas  of  Rousseau,  Robespierre,  and  Babeuf .     Saint- 


CHANGES 


77 


Simon,  later  on  regarded  as  the  founder  of  French 
socialism,  who  developed  his  ideas  especially  in  the  years 
1817-1  S'^o,  proposed  that  all  property  should  be  owned 
by  the  State,  that  inheritance  should  be  abolished,  and  that 
industry  should  be  re^^ulated  by  men  of  science.  Fourier 
believed  that  reform  should  be  made  through  establish- 
ing industrial  communities,  in  which  the  profits  would  be 
divided  among  capital,  labor,  and  talent.  Somewhat 
later  appeared  Louis  Blanc,  who  published  his  Organisa- 
tion du  Travail  (Organization  of  Labor)  in  1839.  He 
condemned  industrial  competition,  and  taught  that  the 
State  should  institute  "social"  workshops,  in  which  the 
workmen  should  choose  their  managers  and  divide  the 
gains.  When  the  Revolution  of  1848  suddenly  broke  out 
in  Paris,  the  socialists  were  for  the  moment  so  strong  that 
Blanc  and  other  leaders  became  members  of  the  provisional 
government  established.  Socialism  had  for  some  time 
been  growing  among  the  masses  in  French  cities,  and 
radical  reforms  had  been  asked  for.  Blanc  and  his  as- 
sociates were  now  ranged  with  the  republicans,  since  they 
believed  that  the  establishment  of  a  republic  would  bring 
best  chance  of  obtaining  the  social  reforms  which  they 
wished  for.  He  declared  that  private  property  ought 
to  be  replaced  bj'  public,  that  everyone  should  have 
opportunity  to  work,  and  that  industry  should  be  con- 
trolled not  under  capitalists  but  in  cooperative  societies 
under  the  workmen  therein  engaged. 

The  great  majority  of  the  people  of  France  were  op- 
posed to  such  schemes  then  as  later,  but  something  was 
accomplished  for  the  moment.  A  commission  was  es- 
tablished under  Blanc  to  consider  the  reforms  which 
socialists  wanted.  Blanc  had  advocated  cooperative  work- 
shops, for  which,  at  the  beginning,  the  necessary  capital 
was  to  be  advanced  by  the  State,  and  in  which  the  enter- 
prise would  be  controlled  by  the  workmen — something 
like  what  the  syndicalists  desired  sixty  years  later.     But 


Saint-Simon 


Louis  Blanc 
in  1848 


78 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Ateliers 
Nationaux 


Decline  of 
the  older 
socialism 


while  his  commission  deHberated  about  various  measures 
— a  ten-hour  working  day,  assistance  for  workmen,  and 
better  conditions  for  them— the  government  put  into  opera- 
tion a  scheme  resembhng  what  he  had  urged,  but  in  char- 
acter actually   quite  different,  and  something  he  would 
never    have    approved.     National    Workshops    {Ateliers 
Nationaux)  were  set  up,  in  which  the  State  was  to  be  the 
employer.     This  was,  indeed,  nothing  more  than  a  gigantic 
system  of  poor  relief,  for  men  were  put  to  work,  irrespec- 
tive of  their  training,  at  digging  and  then  filling  up  the 
holes,  and  at  similar  tasks,  the  State  paying  them  the  uni- 
form wage  of  two  francs  a  day.     Many  applied  for  this 
work,  there  was  not  enough  to  go  around,  and  great 
confusion  and  dissatisfaction  arose.     The  entire  scheme, 
with  which  the  authorities  associated  Blanc's  name,  in- 
curred disrepute,  and  when  the  government,  now  con- 
trolled by  the  bourgeoisie,  felt  itself  stronger,  the  National 
Workshops  were  abolished.     Then  the  socialist  and  radical 
workingmen  of  Paris  rose  in  furious  revolt.     After  terrible 
street  fighting  they  were  completely  crushed,  and  in  1848 
as  in  1796  the  bourgeoisie  remained  completely  triumphant. 
Thus  it  is  evident  that  ideas  of  socialism  or  commimism, 
even  more  than  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  had  had  a  long 
development  before  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
and  that  many  thinkers  who  contributed  to  its  teachings 
continued  to  influence  men  after  this  time.     But  by  1848 
the  socialism  of  Owen,  Fourier,    Saint-Simon,  and  their 
followers  was  visibly   sunk  in  decay;  their  efforts  had 
failed,  and  it  was  apparent  that  their  teachings  had  not 
produced  the  results  they  hoped  for.     Chartism  in  Eng- 
land was  dying  out.     The  schemes  of  Louis  Blanc  had 
failed  in  Paris.      After  1840  many  radical  workmen  had 
lost  faith  in  the  doctrines  of  these  teachers,  and  some 
of  them  began  to  believe  that  reforms  by  the  government, 
and  remedies  brought  by  philanthropists  or  conducted 
by  "men  of  science"  would  help  them  little.     The  better- 


CHANGES 


79 


ment  of  the  condition  of  the  proletariat,  it  was  said,  must 
come  through  the  efforts  of  itself.  The  doctrines  which 
such  men  held  vaguely  and  not  yet  well  defined  had  to 
some  extent  been  stated  by  the  German,  Wilhelm  Weit- 
ling,  and  by  the  Frenchman,  Etienne  Cabet  who  in  1840 
published  his  Voyage  en  Icarie,  a  philosophic  romance 
which  described  the  communism  of  an  ideal  state.  Pres- 
ently German  refugees,  followers  of  this  workingmen's 
movement,  founded  the  Communist  League,  a  secret 
society,  with  headquarters  in  London.  It  was  at  this 
point  that  Marx,  the  great  expounder  of  modern  socialist 
doctrines,  appeared. 

Karl  Marx  (1818-1883)  was  of  Jewish  descent,  and 
came  of  a  middle-class  family  in  Rhenish  Prussia.  He 
was  destined  for  the  law,  but  his  own  inclinations  carried 
him  to  philosophy  and  historical  studies.  He  was  at 
first  a  liberal  bourgeois,  in  the  days  of  political  repression 
in  Germany  before  the  Revolution  of  1848,  Soon  he  found 
it  expedient  to  leave  the  country.  In  1843  he  went  to 
Paris.  There  he  met  Friedrich  Engels,  his  companion  and 
co-worker  thereafter.  Through  study  of  the  teachings 
of  Robert  Owen,  and  through  acquaintance  with  Louis 
Blanc  in  Paris,  Marx  became  a  social  reformer  and  an 
advocate  of  the  workingman's  cause.  In  1847  Marx  and 
Engels  attended  a  meeting  of  the  Communist  League 
held  in  London,  The  views  which  they  there  stated  made 
much  impression,  and  they  were  asked  to  draw  up  a  work- 
ing programme  for  the  League.  This  they  did,  and  in  1848 
appeared  the  Communist  Manifesto,  a  small  pamphlet 
containing  in  brief  form  their  socialist  doctrines.  "Let 
the  ruling  classes  tremble,"  they  said.  "Workmen  of  all 
lands,  unite."  In  1849  Marx,  having  returned  to  Prussia, 
was  expelled  from  the  country.  Presently  along  with  his 
wife  he  took  refuge  in  London,  and  remained  in  England 
till  his  death.  During  these  long  years,  in  the  midst  of 
poverty,  discouragement,  and  meager  living,  sustained  by 


New 
teachings 


Karl  Marx 


Communist 
Manifesto 


80 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Finds  refuge 
in  England 


Influence 
of  Marx 


His  writings 


the  devotion  of  his  wife  and  the  sjmipathy  of  followers  and 
friends,  haunting,  as  many  a  scholar  since  has  done,  the 
round  room  of  the  British  Museum  in  quest  of  materials 
for  research,  writing  in  his  rooms,  often  in  the  midst  of 
the  children  whom  he  loved,  shouting,  tumbling,  harness- 
ing him  as  he  wTote  and  whipping  him  in  the  midst  of 
laughter  and  shouts,  he  composed  his  profound  and  exten- 
sive studies  which  constitute  a  landmark  in  the  develop- 
ment of  historical  and  economic  writing.  His  chief  work. 
Das  Kapital  (Capital),  was  pubhshed  in  1867. 

In  1862  Marx  took  the  lead  in  founding  the  Interna- 
tional Working  Men's  Association,  often  known  as  the 
Internationale,  which  brought  together  in  one  organization 
the  communist  organizations  of  different  countries. 
National  feelings  were  ever  growing  stronger,  despite  the 
new  economic  teachings,  and  it  was  found  impossible  to 
hold  together  the  workmen  of  all  countries  in  one  body, 
so  that  the  Association  soon  broke  down,  though  interna- 
tional meetings  came  together  from  time  to  time  later  on. 
By  1870  belief  in  communism  had  made  considerable 
progress,  though  in  the  next  year  it  received  a  decisive 
setback  in  the  collapse  of  the  Commune  of  Paris,  which 
Marx  had  approved.  But  communism,  or  socialism,  as  it 
was  called  again  later  on,  had  received  vast  impetus  and 
new  meaning  from  the  teachings  of  Engels  and  Marx. 
Everywhere  the  Communist  Manifesto  had  attracted  atten- 
tion. Das  Kapital  had  not  directly  influenced  many,  but 
the  ideas  of  the  master  were  being  reduced  to  simple 
form,  popularized  and  spread  broadcast,  as  new  teachings 
and  great  doctrines  usually  are,  by  numerous  disciples 
who  proclaimed  them  again  and  again.  In  another  genera- 
tion they  had  become  mighty  factors  in  the  intellectual 
and  economic  life  of  the  world;  and  when  the  century 
ended,  it  was  seen  that  the  teachings  of  Marx — like  the 
exhortations  of  Luther  and  Calvin,  like  the  theories  of 
Rousseau,  like  the  doctrine  of  evolution  taught  by  Dar- 


Doctrines 
of  Marx  and 


CHANGES  81 

win — had  profoundly  affected  the  minds  of  great  numbers 
of  men. 

According  to  Marx  there  had  always  been  a  few  at  the 
top  ruling  and  exploiting  the  many  beneath  them.  Be-  Engds 
tween  the  two  groups  there  had  been  a  struggle  from  of 
old.  In  ancient  times  the  contest  was  between  masters 
and  slaves;  slavery  had  gradually  disappeared,  but  then 
society  was  divided  into  the  lords  above  and  the  great  body 
of  the  serfs  beneath  them;  gradually  serfdom  had  dis- 
appeared in  most  places,  as  nobles  and  lords  lost  their 
power,  but  from  the  ruins  of  feudal  society  had  come  the 
modern  bourgeois  society,  and  the  age-long  struggle  was 
still  being  fought  out  between  capitalists  and  industrial 
workers.  "Society  as  a  whole,"  said  the  Communist 
Manifesto,  "is  more  and  more  splitting  up  into  two  great 
hostile  camps,  into  two  great  classes  directly  facing  each 
other:    Bourgeoisie    and    Proletariat."     In    the   end   the     Struggle  of 

Ci3SSGS 

upper  class,  the  workingmen's  enemy  and  master,  would 
be  completely  overthrown.  Now  the  workers  toiled  for 
their  masters  in  factories  and  were  huddled  together  in 
tenements  and  slums,  but  their  number  was  great,  and  if 
they  could  unite  with  the  workers  in  the  country  they 
might  some  day  get  the  government  within  their  control. 
Capital  and  wealth  were  held  by  a  few;  they  were  destined 
to  be  concentrated  in  still  fewer  hands;  then,  finally,  when 
the  people  had  control,  all  would  be  taken  over  by  the 
State  for  the  people.  Marx  declared  that  upper-class 
capitalists  largely  owned  as  private  property  the  wealth 
which  had  been  created  by  the  workers,  and  that  with 
the  destruction  of  the  bourgeoisie  and  their  organization, 
this  would  be  brought  to  an  end  and  capital  be  the  com- 
mon property  of  the  people.  The  Manifesto  stated  in 
simple  form  some  of  the  measures  which  it  was  hoped 
would  be  ordained:  abolition  of  property  in  land,  all  rents 
to  be  taken  for  the  public;  a  heavy  progressive  or  grad- 
uated income  tax;  abolition  of  inheritance;  centralization 


82 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Socialist 
ideas 


Their  char- 
acter 


of  credit  in  the  hands  of  the  State,  the  State  setting  up  a 
national  bank  with  exclusive  monopoly;  all  means  of 
communication  and  transport  to  be  centralized,  controlled 
by  the  State;  State  ownership  of  factories  and  instruments 
of  production;  equal  liability  of  all  to  labor — establish- 
ment of  "industrial  armies";  free  education  of  all  children 
in  public  schools,  and  abolition  of  children's  factory  labor. 
"In  place  of  the  old  bourgeois  society,  with  its  classes  and 
class  antagonisms,  we  shall  have  an  association,  in  which 
the  free  development  of  each  is  the  condition  for  the  free 
development  of  all."  "The  proletarians,"  said  the  Mani- 
festo, "have  nothing  to  lose  but  their  chains.  They  have 
a  world  to  win." 

It  was  the  work  of  these  communist  teachers,  and 
especially  of  Marx,  to  take  the  earlier  socialist  specula- 
tions, and  give  them  firmer  foundation  and  greater  dis- 
tinctness. The  doctrines  of  Marx  were  no  mere  abstrac- 
tions conceived  in  his  own  mind  nor  brilliant  speculations 
based  upon  foundations  which  he  merely  assumed.  For 
years  he  carried  on  tireless  research  in  the  past  records 
of  industrial  history  and  development,  and  whether  or  not 
his  deductions  were  correct,  he  deduced  from  his  study 
of  the  past  his  interpretation  of  the  present  and  prophecies 
for  the  future.  His  conclusion  that  all  history  recorded  a 
struggle  between  classes  was  plausible  enough,  however 
true  it  may  be.  His  prediction  that  the  mass  of  the  people 
would  certainly  control  the  governments  of  their  states 
later  on  was  in  accord  with  the  splendid  dreams  of  the 
democracy  then  developing,  which  since  his  time  have 
developed  so  much  further  still.  His  conclusion  that 
under  the  control  of  the  people  communism  would  be 
established  for  the  betterment  of  the  lot  of  the  people 
had  for  more  than  two  thousand  years  been  the  dream  of 
not  a  few  philosophers  who  hoped  to  ameliorate  the  lot 
of  mankind.  His  idea  that  the  proletariats  of  the  several 
countries  had  interests  in  common  and  should  live  together 


CHANGES 


83 


in  amity  and  accord  was  but  an  aspect  of  the  scheme 
which  many  noble  spirits  have  cherished  for  the  attainment 
of  peace  and  things  better. 

The  ideas  of  Marx  and  other  great  sociahsts  were  carried 
further  and  sometimes  perverted  by  rasher  and  more 
ardent  spirits,  whose  declarations  filled  contemporaries 
with  aversion  and  horror.  Socialism  soon  came  under 
the  stigma  of  intending  to  break  up  the  family,  abolish 
marriage,  bring  community  of  women,  divide  all  prop- 
erty equally,  and  do  away  with  the  Christian  religion. 
There  was  good  reason  to  think  that  if  those  who  cher- 
ished these  ideals  could,  they  would  bring  them  to  pass 
by  force  through  sudden  overturning  and  revolution. 
Accordingly,  socialism,  like  the  doctrine  of  evolution,  had 
to  encounter  not  merely  the  conservative  instinct  of  the 
time  in  which  it  appeared,  but  also  the  repugnance  and 
dread  of  many  who  were  frightened  at  radical  wildness. 
For  not  all  of  this  was  Marx  responsible.  It  should  be 
remembered  also  that,  whatever  his  mistakes,  and  some 
of  them  only  time  will  determine,  his  motives  were  of  the 
best.  He  was  filled  with  a  passionate  humanity  and 
desire  to  make  the  lot  of  his  fellowmen  better.  "The 
poor  always  ye  have  with  you,"  was  the  maxim  which 
had  come  down  through  the  ages;  but  these  socialists  con- 
ceived of  poverty  as  a  disease  in  the  State,  curable,  and 
preventable,  indeed,  if  the  State  were  but  organized  better. 

By  1870  socialism  had  not  achieved  great  results,  and 
the  Commune  of  Paris  next  year  was  to  strike  the  people 
of  Europe  with  horror.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  however,  increasingly  would  its  influence 
grow.  Many  of  the  socialists  themselves  would  gradually 
become  less  extreme,  and  expect  to  bring  their  reforms 
about  slowly,  in  consequence  of  perception  by  most  people 
that  their  doctrines  were  best.  Some  of  their  ideas  in 
course  of  time  would  be  adopted  by  governments  them- 
selves and  put  into  effect,  for  the  most  part,  it  would  seem. 


More  radical 
doctrines 


Criticism 
of  socialist 
doctrines 


84 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Doubt  con- 
cerning 
socialist 
doctrines 


Religion 


The  Greek 

Catholic 

Church 


for  the  better.  Generally,  however,  their  fundamental 
doctrine,  that  private  property  should  be  abolished  and 
that  all  should  be  held  by  the  State  for  the  use  of  its 
people,  would  find  slow  acceptance.  It  would  be  possible 
to  point  out  that  communism  had  existed  probably  in 
every  primitive  society,  and  that  if  the  history  of  man- 
kind extended  over  100,000  years,  perhaps  much  the 
greater  part  of  this  time  had  known  the  existence  of  com- 
munistic society.  It  was  certain,  however,  that  in  the 
development  of  what  most  people  conceived  to  be  the 
better  civilization  of  the  more  recent  centuries,  always 
common  ownership  had  yielded  to  the  system  of  private 
holding.  Whether,  then,  communism  was  well  adapted 
for  advanced  peoples,  whether  it  could  ever  be  put  into 
operation  for  the  welfare  of  the  majority,  in  1870  as  in 
1920,  was  for  most  people  hidden  in  doubt  and  the  future. 

In  the  midst  of  vast  revolutions  thus  going  on  in  the 
realm  of  general  ideas  most  people  continued  to  hold 
to  the  philosophy  and  beliefs  that  had  been  handed 
do\Mi  by  their  Church,  In  the  past,  religion  had  always 
been  the  greatest  of  intellectual  forces  affecting  mankind, 
embodying  science,  philosophy,  explanation  of  the  pres- 
ent and  hope  for  the  future.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the 
Christian  Church,  gradually  taking  the  best  of  the  past 
and  the  present,  had  become  the  most  important  of  all  the 
agents  of  civilization  and  progress.  It  had  seldom  been 
difficult  for  its  ministers  to  hold  the  affection  and  ad- 
herence of  their  followers,  though  always  the  bold  and 
speculative  had  struck  out  on  new  paths  for  themselves. 
Especially  was  this  so  now  during  the  strange  and  won- 
drous time  of  the  nineteenth  century.  During  this  time 
the  three  parts  of  Christianity  in  Europe  met  the  changes 
about  them  with  varying  fortune. 

Least  affected  then  and  for  a  long  time  after  was  the 
Greek  Catholic  or  Orthodox  Church  of  the  East,  which 
counted  among  its  adherents  most  of  the  Russians,  the 


CHANGES  85 

Greeks,  and  most  of  the  South  Slavs  of  the  Balkan  coun-  The  Church 
try.  This  Chiirfh,  lar-cly  controlled  by  the  Russian  of  the  Slavs 
Government  and  working  in  obedience  to  the  tsar,  had 
long  gone  forward  unwavering  in  its  course,  with  ancient 
ritual,  and  ceremonies  of  the  past,  little  troubled  by 
revolts  from  within  and  scarcely  touched  by  influence 
from  without.  The  Russian  people  were  still  oiF  on  one 
side  of  the  Continent,  outside  the  great  currents  that 
were  steadily  changing  western  and  central  Euro[)e.  Cen- 
sorship kept  out  the  new  books  and  prevented  new  teach- 
ings; police  suppressed  all  innovators  or  drove  them  away. 
Almost  all  the  people  were  illiterate  and  simple.  In 
Russia,  accordingly,  socialism  as  yet  had  no  footing,  and 
evolution  was  scarcely  known  of.  The  Russian  Church 
thus  remote  continued  to  be  generally  followed  and 
obeyed  by  the  people,  whose  great  teacher  it  remained, 
whose  traditions  it  embodied,  and  whose  national  con- 
sciousness it  fostered.  Most  of  the  Russian  people  were, 
as  ever,  simple-minded  peasants,  cherishmg  their  ikons 
or  images,  crossing  themselves  devoutly  as  they  passed 
by  the  shrines  and  the  churches. 

Since  the  French  Revolution  the  Roman  Catholic  The  Roman 
Church  had  been  passing  through  vicissitudes  much  (,^|J^°^^*^ 
greater.  In  several  countries  it  had  been  deprived  of  its 
property;  in  1860  most  of  the  territory  of  the  popes  had 
been  taken  from  them;  they  still  held  the  city  of  Rome 
and  a  little  district  about  it,  though  twice,  in  18G2  and 
1867,  Garibaldi  had  tried  to  take  this,  and  the  papal 
tenure  was  now  entirely  dependent  upon  European  politi- 
cal conditions.  One  of  the  popes  had  been  carried  off 
a  prisoner  by  Napoleon.  Furthermore,  the  populations 
of  western  and  central  Europe,  in  the  midst  of  which  this 
Church  was  established,  were  far  more  enlightened  than 
those  of  the  eastern  lands.  Its  adherents  were  much 
in  contact  with  the  great  changes  in  science  and  culture 
and  much  more  affected  by  them,  so  that  the  western 


86 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  French 
Revolution 
and  Na- 
poleon 


Older  condi- 
tions re- 
stored 


Church  had  again  and  again  to  encounter  new  ideas 
which  threatened  to  undermine  its  power. 

The  Roman  Cathohc  Church  had  been  touched  by  the 
French  Revolution  much  more  than  the  Protestant 
Churches,  for  the  effects  of  the  Revolution  were  greater 
and  lasted  longer  in  Catholic  countries.  During  the 
Revolution  the  lands  of  the  Church  had  been  confiscated 
in  France.  A  little  later,  during  the  Terror,  the  extreme 
revolutionists  suppressed  the  Christian  religion,  closed 
the  churches,  and  proclaimed  the  worship  of  Reason.  A 
reaction  had,  indeed,  soon  followed,  and  Napoleon,  under- 
standing the  sentiments  of  most  of  the  people  and  their 
veneration  for  the  faith  of  their  fathers,  had  respected 
Christianity  and  given  it  the  protection  of  the  govern- 
ment. In  1801  he  had  made  with  Pius  VII  the  famous 
Concordat  or  agreement;  but  he  had  soon  come  into 
conflict  with  this  pope  and  cast  him  into  prison.  For  a 
short  time  after  1809  Napoleon  made  good  the  ideal  of  the 
greatest  medieval  emperors;  he  considered  himself  to  be 
head  of  the  Empire  and  superior  to  the  Church,  with  the 
pope  subordinate  and  dependent.  Not  since  the  time 
of  the  Babylonian  Captivity  in  the  fourteenth  century, 
when  the  popes  resided  at  Avignon  under  the  shadow  of 
the  power  of  France,  had  papal  authority  been  so  much 
lowered. 

All  this  came  to  an  end  with  the  fall  of  Napoleon; 
and  after  the  Congress  of  Vienna  the  Church  recovered. 
The  ecclesiastical  property  confiscated  in  France  was  not 
restored,  but  the  gifts  of  pious  Catholics  founded  a  new 
wealth  for  it.  During  this  period  of  restoration  and  reac- 
tion people  remembered  that  the  Church  had  been  at- 
tacked at  the  same  time  that  so  many  other  venerable 
institutions  were  overthrown;  and  the  ruling  class  often 
believed  that  the  worst  excesses  of  the  radicals  and 
revolutionists  could  not  have  happened  had  not  religion 
and  the  Church  been  abandoned.     Accordingly,  it  was 


CHANGES 


87 


thought  well  that  priests  should  have  their  old  influence; 
education  was  placed  in  their  hands;  and  they  were  sup- 
ported by  the  government,  to  which  in  turn  they  gave 
faithful  assistance. 

It  was  presently  seen,  however,  that  it  was  not  the 
violence  of  Hebert  or  Napoleon,  but  the  continuing  ideas 
of  the  French  Revolution  and  those  now  brought  about 
by  the  Industrial  Revolution  in  process,  the  scientific 
advance,  and  the  new  ideas,  that  were  dangerous  to  the 
old  beliefs  and  to  the  temporal  power  of  the  Church.  Civil 
and  religious  equality  made  people  different  from  what 
they  had  been.  Socialism  was  rising,  and  during  the 
remainder  of  the  century  it  had  greater  and  greater  effect 
upon  the  outlook  of  people  in  the  lower  as  well  as  the  upper 
classes.  From  the  first  the  teachings  of  the  socialists 
made  men  less  inclined  to  follow  without  question  the  old 
doctrines  cf  the  Churches.  During  all  this  time  also 
great  discoveries,  strange  inventions,  and  bold  specula- 
tions laid  the  foundation  for  an  entirely  different  way  of 
looking  at  things,  which  made  it  impossible  for  some  to 
believe  any  longer  what  their  fathers  had  accepted  with- 
out question. 

Among  the  great  movements  of  this  time  none  was 
more  striking  than  the  spread  of  education  in  the  western 
half  of  Europe.  Hence  people  were  more  easily  brought 
to  a  knowledge  of  the  great  new  doctrines  and  the  wonder- 
ful experiments  and  discoveries  that  were  taking  place, 
and  the  alterations  in  human  knowledge  which  followed. 
A  different  spirit  had  been  developing  since  the  eighteenth 
century  and  constantly  spreading.  INlore  and  more  did 
people  require  reasons  for  what  they  were  asked  to  believe, 
and  demand  proofs  of  what  was  submitted.  Discover- 
ies in  the  realms  of  biology,  chemistry,  and  physics  ex- 
plained an  immense  number  of  things,  and  promised 
to  explain  many  more.  In  course  of  time  those  who 
understood  the  writings  of  Lyell,  Darwin,  and  Huxley 


Conflict 
with  the 
new  ideas 


Education 
and  scienti- 
fic spirit 


88 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Science  and 
religion  in 
Catholic 
countries 


Scepticism 
and  religious 
devotion 


came  to  conceive  of  things  in  terms  of  science  where 
before  they  had  as  a  matter  of  faith  beheved  what  was 
taught.  These  people  or  their  teachers  began  to  subject 
even  the  Bible  to  "higher  criticism,"  just  as  they  would 
examine  the  texts  of  Shakespeare  or  Virgil;  to  investigate 
the  history  of  religions  just  as  they  would  search  for  the 
origins  of  feudalism  or  the  rise  of  parliaments  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages;  and  in  consequence  they  began  to  doubt  or  reject 
many  things  which  the  Church  had  said  must  be  believed. 
All  the  Churches  of  western  Europe  had  to  encounter 
this  spirit  increasingly  in  the  century  after  the  French 
Revolution,  and  all  of  them  were  shaken  by  it.  The 
Roman  Catholic  Church  met  the  situation  as  it  had  met 
similar  ones  in  the  past.  The  doctrines  it  taught  were  to 
be  considered  divinely  inspired  and  unalterably  true. 
Circumstances  in  the  world  around  might  change  and 
science  bring  revelation  and  discoveries,  but  always  the 
teachings  of  the  Church  remained  true  as  they  had  been 
from  the  first ;  and  they  were  to  be  entirely  accepted  by  the 
faithful.  Accordingly,  as  the  gap  widened  between  what 
had  been  of  old  and  what  the  effects  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion were  producing,  between  the  old  industrial  system 
and  the  results  of  the  Industrial  Revolution,  between  the 
teachings  of  the  fathers  and  hierarchs  of  the  Church  and 
the  new  ideas  taught  by  the  socialists,  between  the  stories 
contained  in  the  Bible  and  the  conclusions  of  scientific 
scholars.  Catholic  populations  remained  divided  in  two 
parts,  as,  indeed,  they  had  been  in  the  eighteenth  century 
when  the  enlightened  sceptics  were  doing  their  work: 
many  belonging  to  the  upper  intellectual  classes  with  bet- 
ter education  either  'abandoned  their  religion  or  remained 
Catholics  merely  in  name;  the  larger  body  of  the  poor,  the 
humble,  and  the  simple  clung  to  priests  and  the  Church  as 
their  fathers  and  their  mothers  before  them,  together  with 
many  of  the  cultured  and  learned,  to  whom  the  new  knowl- 
edge seemed  less  good  than  the  old. 


CHANGES 


89 


The  Roman  Catholic  Church  was  far  from  remaining 
a  passive  spectator  of  tlie  conflict  going  on  around  il.  Gen- 
erally speaking,  it  su^jported  the  best  of  the  old  order  and 
opposed  revolutions  and  changes;  it  favored  monarchies 
rather  than  the  revolutionary  republics  which  a})i)eared; 
it  opposed  socialism  and  set  itself  sternly  against  "free 
thinking"  or  any  attempt  to  compromise  with  the  new 
knowledge  by  abandoning  any  part  of  the  older  faith. 

The  authorities  of  the  Church  condemned  the  new 
socialist  teachings  completely.  Generally  the  ecclesiastics 
of  western  Europe  were  against  the  ideas  of  Marx,  but 
the  most  formidable  opposition  came  from  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  In  18G4  Pope  Pius  IX  denounced 
socialism  and  communism  in  the  Si/IIabus  of  Errors. 
Churchmen,  remembering  the  extremities  of  the  French 
Revolution,  and  considering  some  of  the  teachings  of  the 
socialist  leaders,  believed  that  communism  aimed  at  the 
overthrow  of  Christianity  altogether.  Socialists  looked 
upon  the  churches,  and  especially  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  as  great  established  interests,  founded  upon  the 
old  system  and  identified  with  its  fortunes,  and  hence 
great  obstacles  in  the  way  of  alteration  for  the  better. 

Against  all  other  innovations  the  Church  spoke  no  less 
strongly.  In  1864  Pius  IX  issued  the  encyclical  (circular 
letter)  Quanta  Cura  at  the  same  time  with  the  Syllabus 
(summary)  of  Errors.  Here  he  rigidly  upheld  all  the  old 
contentions  of  the  Church,  and  condenmed  all  who  tended 
toward  free  thinking,  religious  liberty,  or  any  diminution 
of  the  authority  of  the  Church  by  abolishing  ecclesiastical 
courts,  by  making  the  clergy  less  subordinate  to  Rome, 
by  establishing  lay  marriage,  and  putting  education  under 
laymen's  control.  Nor  was  this  all.  In  1854  the  Pope 
had  promulgated  the  doctrine  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception of  the  Virgin,  INIary.  In  December,  1809,  was 
assembled  an  ecumenical  council  of  the  (,'hurch  at  Rome, 
the  first   which    had    been    brought   together    since   the 


Attitude 
of  the 
Church 


Socialism 
opposed 


The  Sylla- 
bus of 
Errors 


90 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Vatican 

Council, 

1869-70 


The  Prot- 
estant 
Churches 


Council  of  Trent  concluded  its  sessions  in  1563.  At 
this  Council  of  the  Vatican  proposals  were  made  to 
affirm  the  doctrine  of  the  Infallibility  of  the  Popes. 
This  was  so  counter  to  the  tendencies  of  the  age,  in 
which  philosophy  and  science  were  making  many  people 
increasingly  doubtful  about  the  absolute  truth  of  any- 
thing, that  many  Catholics  were  strongly  opposed  to  it, 
and  at  first  only  a  minority  in  the  Council  could  be  brought 
to  support  it.  Through  skilful  management,  however, 
and  largely  because  of  pressure  and  persuasion  from  the 
pope,  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility  was  affirmed; 
that  is  to  say,  that  the  pope,  speaking  ex  cathedra  (as  pope) 
with  respect  to  affairs  of  the  Church,  could  not  err.  Even 
after  the  work  of  the  Council  was  done,  some  Catholics 
refused  to  accept  the  doctrine  newly  proclaimed;  but  in  so 
far  as  they  remained  in  the  Church,  after  a  while  they  were 
forced  to  yield.  Thus  in  1870  the  Church  was  presenting 
to  the  world  a  front  unchanged  and  unchanging;  but 
circumstances  around  it  were  altering  more  swiftly  than 
ever  before. 

The  Protestant  Churches  during  this  period  were  con- 
fronted with  many  of  these  same  problems,  but  there  is 
less  to  be  said  about  them,  since  no  one  of  them  presented 
so  striking  or  powerful  an  organization  as  either  the 
Greek  Catholic  or  the  Roman  Catholic  Church.  The 
Protestant  creeds  were  professed  in  some  of  the  greatest 
countries  of  Europe,  but  the  character  and  the  organiza- 
tion of  their  Churches  was  such  that  they  could  not  play 
the  large  part  in  politics  and  international  relations  taken 
by  the  Papal  See.  The  circumstances  of  the  Reformation 
had  brought  it  about  that  when  the  Protestant  Churches 
were  established,  they  were  put  under  the  control  of  the 
State,  and  after  that  time  the  Anglican  Church  in  Eng- 
land and  the  Lutheran  Church  in  Prussia  had  remained 
great  and  wealthy,  but  usually  passive  and  obedient  in 
their  established  position. 


CHANGES 


91 


During  the  nineteenth  century  they  strove,  Hke  the 
CathoHc  Church,  to  hold  to  the  privileges  and  the  teach- 
ings they  had  long  maintained.  They  also  had  to  meet  the 
changes  in  life  and  thought  that  arose  all  during  this 
time,  and  their  adherents  also  were  often  torn  by  struggle 
between  the  old  beliefs  and  the  new  revelations  of  science. 
But  notwithstanding  that  many  Protestant  ministers 
regarded  Darwin  and  Huxley  as  atheists  and  accursed, 
and  the  doctrines  of  Saint-Simon  and  Marx  as  dangerous 
and  grounded  in  error,  and  notwithstanding  that  the 
Protestant  Churches  also  regarded  their  own  doctrines  as 
unquestionably  true  and  unchanging,  yet  in  the  case  of 
Protestants  it  was  often  less  difficult  to  reconcile  science 
and  new  social  doctrine  with  religion;  for  Protestantism, 
in  spite  of  itself,  had  always  conduced  toward  freedom 
of  thought.  The  early  Protestants  had  had  no  idea 
whatever  of  permitting  intellectual  or  religious  freedom, 
but  they  had  broken  away  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church;  and  what  they  had  done  others  did  more  easily 
afterward.  Not  only  had  many  new  Protestant  sects 
been  founded,  but  within  these  sects  individuals  tended 
more  and  more  to  the  belief  that  each  person  might  be 
his  own  judge.  A  great  many  Protestants,  therefore, 
were  less  under  the  authority  of  the  heads  of  their  Church, 
and  more  in  the  habit  of  judging  for  themselves.  Ac- 
cordingly, after  some  struggle,  many  Protestants  modi- 
fied their  religious  beliefs  so  as  to  bring  them,  as  they 
thought,  into  conformity  with  the  new  teachings  of 
philosophy  and  science,  and  in  course  of  time  a  consider- 
able number  of  their  ministers  and  leaders  had  been  able 
to  do  this  likewise. 


Conflict 
with  the 
new  teach- 
ings 


Freedom  of 
thought 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Evolution:  H.  F.  Osborn,  From  the  Greeks  to  Darwin  (1894), 
for  a  brief  account  of  the  development  of  the  doctrine;  G.  F. 
Romanes,  Darwin  and  After  Darwin,  3  vols.  (1906-10);  Charles 


92  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Darwin,  On  the  Origin  of  Species  by  Means  of  Natural  Selection 
(1859),  The  Descent  of  Man  (1871);  Life  and  Letters  of  Charles 
Darwin,  edited  by  Francis  Darwin,  2  vols.  (1887);  Thomas  H. 
Huxley,  Collected  Essays,  9  vols.  (1893-4);  James  Marchant, 
Alfred  Russcl  Wallace,  Letters  and  Reminiscences,  2  vols.  (1916). 
Rationalism  and  freedom  of  thought:  A.  W.  Benn,  A  History 
of  English  Rationalisjn  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols.  (1906); 
J.  T.  INIerz,  A  History  of  European  Thought  in  the  Nineteenth 
Century,  4  vols.  (1896-1914),  excellent;  A.  C.  McGiffert,  The 
Rise  of  Modern  Religious  Ideas  (1915);  J.  M.  Robertson,  A  Short 
History  of  Free  Thought  (3d  ed.  1915). 

Socialism:  R.  C.  K.  Ensor,  Modern  Socialism,  as  Set  Forth 
by  Socialists  in  Their  Speeches,  Writings,  and  Programmes  (3d 
ed.  1910),  a  convenient  collection  of  sources.  For  general  ref- 
erence: EncyclopSdie  Socialiste  (ed.  by  Compere-Morel),  8  vols. 
(1912-13);  Josef  Stammhammer,  Bibliographic  des  Socialismus 
mid  Communismus,  3  vols.  (1893-1909).  M.  Beer,  Geschichte  des 
Sozialismus  in  England  (1913),  A  History  of  British  Socialism, 
2  vols.  (1919-20),  an  improved  English  version  by  the  author; 
Alfred  Fouillee,  Le  Socialisme  et  la  Sociologie  RSformiste  (1909) ; 
E.  Fourniere,  Les  Theories  Socialistes  an  XIX'  Siecle,  de  Babe^if 
a  Proudhon  (1904);  Morris  lAiWqmi,  Socialism  in  Theory  and 
Practice  (1909) ;  Gaston  Isambert,  Les  IdSes  Socialistes  en  France 
de  1815  a  18^8  (1905);  Thomas  Kirkup,  A  History  of  Socialism 
(5th  ed.  1913);  J.  R.  Macdonald,  Socialism  and  Government, 
2  vols.  (1909),  The  Socialist  Movement  (1911);  W.  H.  Mallock, 
A  Critical  Examination  of  Socialism  (1907);  O.  D.  Skelton, 
Socialism:  a  Critical  Analysis  (1911),  excellent  criticism  of; 
John  Spargo,  Socialism:  a  Summary  and  Interpretation  of 
Socialist  Principles  (ed.  1909). 

Socialist  leaders  and  their  writings:  J.  Tchernoff,  Louis  Blanc 
(1904);  John  Spargo,  Karl  Marx,  His  Life  and  Work  (1910); 
Karl  Marx,  Das  Kapital  (1867),  trans,  by  S.  Moore,  E.  B. 
Aveling,  and  E.  Untermann,  Capital,  a  Critique  of  Political 
Economy,  3  vols.  (1907-9);  Karl  Marx  and  Friedrich  Engels, 
Manifesto  of  the  Communist  Party  (1848),  numerous  editions; 
Frank  Podmore,  Robert  Given,  a  Biography,  2  vols.  (1906). 

Roman  Catholicism:  William  Barry,  The  Papacy  and  Mod- 
dern  Times  (1911);  Antonin  Debidour,  Ilistoire  des  Rapports  de 
VEglise  et  de  VElat  en  France  de  17S9  a  1870  (1898);  Pierre  de 
la  Gorce,  Histoire  Religieuse  de  la  Revolidion  Frangaise,  3  vols. 
(1012-19);  -Joseph  MacCaffrey,  History  of  the  Catholic  Church  in 


CHANGES  93 

the  Nineteenth  Centiiry,  2  vols.  (1010),  by  a  Catholic  Scholar; 
Fredrik  Nielsen,  trans,  from  the  Danish  by  A.  J.  Mason, //I'.v/or?/ 
of  the  Papacy  in  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols.  (1906),  from  the 
Lutheran  point  of  view;  Paul  Pisani,  Ij'fjjlise  de  Paris  ct  la  Revolu- 
tion, 4  vols.  (1908-11);  G.  Weill,  Ili.sluire  du  Catholicisvie  Liber- 
al en  France,  1 828-1908  (1909).  A  convenient  and  excellent 
collection  of  the  sources  is  Carl  Mirbt,  Quellen  zur  Geschichte 
des  Papsttums  und  des  Romischen  Katholizismus  (3d  ed.  1911). 
Protestantism:  F.  W.  Cornish,  A  History  of  the  Church  of 
England  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1910),  best;  II.  W.  Clark, 
History  of  English  Nonconformity  (1913). 


The 

United 
Kingdom  of 
Great  Brit- 
ain and 
Ireland 


CHAPTER   V 
THE   EUROPEAN   STATES   IN    1870 

The  prospects  with  which  the  year  terminated  were  those  of  durable 
peace  to  this  country,  and  of  a  general  settlement  of  the  affairs  of 
the  continent.  .  .  .  There  were,  indeed,  appearances  which  a 
boding  mind  might  regard  as  presaging  an  interruption  of  the 
calm.  .  .  . 
Annual  Register,  For  the  Year  1870,  p.  1  (on  the  state  of  affairs 
at  the  end  of  the  year  1869). 

Le  peuple  frangais  est  convoque,     .     .     .     pour  accepter  ou  rejeter 
le  projet  de  plebiscite  suivant:  "Le  peuple  approuve  les  reformes 
liberales  operees  dans  la  Constitution  depuis  1860,  par  rEmi>er- 
eur. 
Decree  of  Napoleon  HI,  April  20,  1870:  £mile  Oluvier;  L' Em- 
pire Liberal,  xiii.  332. 

Es  ist  in  einem  anderen  Lande  von  amtlicher  Stelle  aus  gesagt 
worden:  der  Friede  Europas  beruhe  auf  dem  Degen  Frank- 
reichs  .  .  .  aber  dass  .  .  .  jeder  Staat,  dem  seine  Ehre 
und  Unabhangigheit  lieb  ist,  sich  bewusst  sein  muss,  dass  sein 
Friede  und  seine  Sicherheit  auf  seinem  eigenen  Degen  beruht, — ich 
glaube,  meine  Herren,  dariiber  werden  wir  alle  einig  sein. 

Speech  of  Bismarck,  May  22,  1869:  Horst  Kohl,  Bismarck- 
Regesten  (1891),  i.  373. 

In  1870  the  most  powerful  European  state  was  the 
United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  of  which 
the  important  member  was  Great  Britain,  with  England 
the  principal  part.  Close  as  was  the  proximity  of  Britain 
to  the  European  continent,  important  and  constant  as 
her  relations  with  the  rest  of  Europe  necessarily  were,  her 
insular  position  continued,  as  during  a  long  time  in  the 
past,  to  make  her  principal  interests  elsewhere.  Before 
the  period  of  her  greatness  England  had  been  a  small  and 
unimportant  country  on  the  outskirts  of  Europe,  though 

94 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870 


95 


sometimes  her  excellent  soldiery  had  won  great  victories 
in  France.  The  fundamental  change  in  trade  routes  and 
relative  geographical  position  made  the  beginning  of  a 
great  alteration  in  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  cen- 
turies, during  which  time  the  English,  through  good 
fortune,  through  their  enterprise  and  skill,  and  because 
their  geographical  position  was  now  one  of  the  best  in  the 
world,  laid  the  foundations  of  a  great  colonial  empire, 
and  became  the  wealthiest  trading  nation  in  the  world. 
This  position  they  maintained  in  a  series  of  successful  wars 
with  Spain,  with  Holland,  and  with  France.  In  1707 
England  and  Scotland  were  firmly  and  finally  united. 
After  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  beginning  in  Britain,  advanced  there  with 
gigantic  strides,  bringing  much  increase  of  wealth  and 
power  to  the  nation.  In  1801  Ireland,  previously  con- 
quered and  long  held  in  dependence  and  subjection,  was 
incorporated  with  Great  Britain  in  the  United  Kingdom. 
During  all  this  time  the  colonial  dominions  were  extended, 
and  although  the  best  of  the  colonies  had  revolted  and 
become  independent,  as  the  United  States,  yet  all  through 
the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  British  Empire 
continued  to  expand  in  wealth,  in  greatness,  and  in  power. 
In  the  course  of  this  development  the  principal  inter- 
ests of  Britain  had  been  outside  of  Europe,  over  the 
oceans,  in  the  dominions,  and  along  the  trade  routes  of  the 
world.  In  European  affairs  usually  she  took  as  little  part 
as  she  could.  The  wars  wuth  Spain  and  Holland  and 
France  were  fought  largely  about  colonies  and  trade.  In 
general,  it  was  the  great  pmrpose  of  Britain  to  maintain 
the  Balance  of  Power  in  Europe,  and  prevent  any  state 
from  obtaining  such  greatness  as  to  be  a  danger  to  its 
neighbors  and  herself.  Hence  she  had  twice  taken  part  in 
great  wars  against  France,  assisting  Germans  and  others 
to  resist  Louis  XIV  and  Napoleon.  Her  greatest  duel 
had  been  with  France  during  the  Revolution  and  under 


Causes  of 
the  great- 
ness of 
England 


British 
policy 


96 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Struggle 

with 

Napoleon 


Government 


Extension  of 
the  fran- 
chise 


Napoleon;  and  during  some  years  in  the  period  of  Na- 
poleon's greatness,  she  alone,  guarded  by  her  navy  and 
supported  by  her  industry  and  trade,  had  held  out  against 
him.  During  those  years  she  had  assisted  all  of  his  enemies 
and  expended  vast  sums  in  the  struggle.  After  Waterloo 
the  great  menace  of  his  power  had  been  finally  removed, 
and  Britain,  needing  time  to  restore  her  strength  and 
reduce  the  immense  national  debt  of  £840,000,000  which 
weighed  down  upon  her,  soon  withdrew  as  much  as 
possible  from  European  affairs,  into  what  was  sometimes 
spoken  of  as  "splendid  isolation." 

The  government  of  Britain  in  1870  was  the  most 
advanced  and  liberal  in  Europe;  and,  except  for  certain 
years  during  the  French  Revolution  when  Frenchmen 
made  such  rapid  reforms,  it  had  been  so  for  many  gene- 
rations. Practically  this  government  was  vested  in  a 
parliament,  the  more  important  part  of  which,  the  House 
of  Commons,  was  elected  by  a  portion  of  the  people.  At 
the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  this  parliamentary 
representation  had  not  been  in  proportion  to  population, 
nor  had  more  than  one  man  out  of  ten  the  right  to  vote, 
the  franchise  being  generally  restricted  by  property  quali- 
fications. The  French  Revolution  and  ideas  of  political 
equality  and  the  rights  of  man  had  little  direct  effect  upon 
Britain  for  some  time,  save  to  cause  a  temporary  reaction, 
but  after  the  threatening  danger  of  revolution  and  war 
had  passed,  gradually  great  changes  were  made.  In  1832 
the  franchise  was  somewhat  extended.  In  1867  it  was 
extended  considerably  more.  Even  this  latter  reform 
law  by  no  means  permitted  all  the  men  of  the  United 
Kingdom  to  vote,  the  franchise  still  being  restricted  by 
property  qualifications.  Such  restriction  might  seem  to 
compare  unfavorably  with  conditions  in  the  French  Second 
Empire  and  in  the  new  North  German  Confederation, 
where  universal  manhood  suffrage  now  prevailed;  but  in 
the  Confederation  the  legislature  thus  elected  did  not 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870 


07 


really  control  the  government,  and  in  France  all  real  power 
had  been  taken  into  the  emperor's  hands.  In  Britain 
by  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  executive, 
the  cabinet  or  ministry,  had  come  to  be,  in  effect,  a  com- 
mittee of  the  House  of  Commons,  directly  dependent  for  a 
continuance  of  power  on  the  supi)ort  of  a  majority  of  the 
representatives  elected  to  the  Commons.  In  Prussia  the 
ministers  were  the  king's  ministers,  and  in  France  since  the 
Restoration,  though  the  British  system  of  government 
had  been  copied,  as  it  was  during  the  nineteenth  century 
in  most  European  countries  when  constitutionalism  was 
established,  generally  the  ministry  had  not  been  de- 
pendent upon  a  legislative  majority  and  hence  not  con- 
trolled by  it.  However,  it  should  be  noticed,  that  in 
France  at  this  very  time,  since  the  power  of  Napoleon  III 
had  been  weakening  year  by  year,  he  had  been  striving  to 
conciliate  the  people  to  his  rule  by  making  the  government 
more  liberal  to  please  them,  and  that  in  1870  the  ministry 
was  made  dependent  upon  the  representatives  elected,  as 
in  the  United  Kingdom. 

During  this  time,  while  the  franchise  was  being  more 
widely  extended  in  the  United  Kingdom — so  that  gradu- 
ally the  government  was  being  transformed  from  an 
aristocracy,  which  it  had  been  at  the  beginning  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  to  a  commonwealth  in  which  a  great 
part  of  the  people  had  direct  control  of  the  government  for 
themselves — the  rule  of  the  Empire  also  was  liberalized. 
In  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  armed  forces 
previously  stationed  in  the  various  outlying  parts  were 
gradually  withdrawn  from  those  communities  in  which 
white  men  predominated,  at  the  same  time  that  the 
government  of  these  communities  was  being  transferred 
to  the  control  of  their  inhabitants.  A  beginning  had  been 
made  by  the  Canada  Government  Act  of  1840;  and  this 
was  merely  the  first  stage  in  a  process  by  which  the  British 
Empire  was  to  be  gradually  transformed  in  part  from  an 


The  govern- 
ment con- 
trolled by 
representa- 
tives elected 


The  British 
Empire 


98 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Social 
reforms 


Evil  condi- 
tions in 
Ireland 


imperial  organization  of  the  old  type  into  a  group  of  self- 
governing  dominions  bound  together  by  common  heritage 
and  mutual  attachment. 

During  the  period  after  the  fall  of  Napoleon,  old  laws 
passed  for  discrimination  or  persecution  had  been  re- 
moved, and  presently  efforts  were  made  to  better  the  lot 
of  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  Church  of  England  had 
been  established  as  part  of  the  government  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  and  thereafter  many  discriminations  were  made 
against  Roman  Catholics  and  Protestants  not  adhering  to 
the  Anglican  Church.  Moreover,  the  government  had 
during  the  eighteenth  century  come  substantially  under 
the  control  of  the  great  aristocrats  and  property  owners. 
But  in  1828  and  1829  respectively  were  repealed  the  laws 
against  Dissenters  and  Roman  Catholics,  which  had  de- 
barred them  from  many  of  the  rights  of  citizens.  The 
passing  of  the  electoral  reform  laws  widened  the  electorate 
and  gave  a  share  of  the  government  first  to  the  middle 
class  then  to  a  portion  of  the  lower  class.  Enlarged 
power  of  the  lower  class  together  with  the  increasing 
humanitarianism  of  the  time  led  to  the  passing  in  1833  and 
1844  of  laws  to  regulate  hours  of  labor  for  women  and 
children,  while  beginning  with  1824  a  series  of  laws  was 
passed  legalizing  the  trade  unions  of  workers,  formerly 
forbidden.  For  some  time  there  was  great  discontent 
among  the  poorer  people,  the  Chartists  demanding  more 
rapid  reform  and  much  more  thorough  change,  but  after 
1848  this  died  out  very  largely.  In  1846  the  so-called 
Corn  Laws  had  been  repealed,  thereby  allowing  the  im- 
portation of  cheap  food  for  the  masses.  Then  still  greater 
industrial  prosperity  developed.  In  1870  Britain  was  first 
in  commerce  and  first  in  industry  and  wealth. 

In  the  splendid  prosperity  and  power  of  Great  Britain, 
Ireland,  the  other  part  of  the  United  Kingdom,  had  almost 
no  share,  though  industrialism  had  been  successfully 
developed  in  the  northeastern  portion  among  the  British 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870 


99 


immigrants  in  Ulster.  In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth 
centuries  Ireland  had  finally  been  conquered  by  England, 
the  land  had  been  confiscated,  and  the  Celtic  people  had 
been  dispossessed.  During  the  eighteenth  century  they 
bad  been  subjected  to  discriminations  which  debarred 
most  of  them  from  almost  all  of  a  citizen's  rights.  The 
great  majority  of  them  lived  as  poverty-stricken  ten- 
ants on  the  estates  of  landlords.  In  1793,  however,  Irish 
Catholics  were  allowed  to  vote  in  elections,  and  in  1829 
they,  along  with  Catholics  in  Great  Britain,  were  given 
political  equality  with  Protestants.  Forty  years  later 
the  Irish  Church,  a  Protestant  Church  imposed  by  the 
government  upon  an  unwilling  Catholic  population,  was 
abolished,  and  in  1870,  indeed,  a  series  of  laws  was  begun 
by  which  in  course  of  time  the  economic  condition  of  the 
peasants  would  be  immensely  improved.  Actually,  how- 
ever, by  1870,  the  condition  of  these  people  had  not  been 
greatly  bettered.  Since  the  beginning  of  the  century  the 
population,  as  is  often  the  case,  had  been  increasing  very 
rapidly  in  the  midst  of  ignorance,  misery,  and  scanty  living. 
Agriculture  was  the  sole  support  of  the  peasants,  who  held 
the  little  patches  of  ground  which  they  worked  by  paying 
rack-rents  to  English  landlords.  Frequently  they  suffered 
hunger  and  were  near  to  starvation.  In  1846-9  a  great 
famine,  followed  by  pestilence,  swept  away  a  large  part 
of  the  population,  after  which  there  began  an  exodus 
of  the  surviving  people  to  other  lands,  especially  to  the 
United  States.  The  population,  which  had  increased  from 
5,000,000  at  the  beginning  of  the  century  to  8,000,000  by 
1846,  was  now  rapidly  declining,  as  emigrants  year  by 
year  were  leaving  their  home  to  carry  unquenchable  hatred 
of  Britain  to  other  countries  all  over  the  world.  Just 
before  1870  the  Fenians,  an  Irish  revolutionary  society, 
supported  by  Irishmen  in  America,  were  attempting  to 
get  independence  for  Ireland  by  creating  a  reign  of  terror 
in  Ireland  and  in  England, 


The  con- 
quest of 
Ireland 


The  Great 
Famine 


United 
States 


100  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Great  Brit-  Irishmen  in  the  United  States  had  long  been  doing, 

ainandthe  yv'hat  they  afterward  continued  to  do,  as  much  as  they 
could  to  embitter  relations  between  Britain  and  the 
United  States.  These  relations,  which  had  not  been  good, 
were  now  nevertheless  improving.  In  1783,  following 
the  American  Revolutionary  War,  the  principal  English 
colonies  on  the  mainland  of  North  America  had  won  in- 
dependence. Viewed  in  larger  aspect  now  this  struggle 
appears  as  one  of  the  few  civil  wars  among  the  English- 
speaking  people.  In  the  years  1641-1660  there  had  been 
civil  war  in  England  itself,  but  after  great  temporary 
upheaval  this  at  last  came  to  an  end.  In  the  years  1775- 
1783  there  was  conflict  between  the  two  principal  parts 
of  the  English-speaking  people  on  the  two  sides  of  the 
Atlantic  Ocean.  This  resulted  in  the  secession  of  the 
American  commonwealths  and  the  permanent  division 
of  the  English-speaking  people  into  two  principal  separate 
parts.  From  1861  to  1865  there  was  a  struggle  among 
the  English-speaking  people  in  the  United  States,  but 
after  the  longest  and  most  terrible  war  since  Napoleon's 
time,  the  South,  which  had  attempted  to  establish  its 
separation  and  independence,  was  forcibly  brought  back 
and  reunited  in  the  United  States.  All  during  the  period 
since  the  adoption  of  the  American  Constitution  (1787-9), 
and  indeed  little  interrupted  by  the  conflict  of  the  Civil 
War,  the  young  nation  had  gone  forward  with  giant 
strides  to  greater  prosperity  and  power,  until  now  it  held 
promise  of  being,  what  it  was  destined  to  become  in  an- 
other fifty  years,  the  wealthiest  and  most  important  group 
of  civilized  people  in  the  world.  Already  by  1870  its 
population  exceeded  that  of  the  United  Kingdom. 
The  two  Between  Britain  and  the  United  States  there  had  long 

great  been  much  rancor  and  ill-feeling,  though  since  1814  never 

branches  of  ^^^  armed  conflict.  Memories  of  the  Revolutionary  War 
speaking^  '  ^nd  the  War  of  1812  caused  most  Americans  to  think  of  the 
people  British  as  oppressors  whose  yoke  had  been  cast  off,  at  the 


5.     EUE 


:  IN  1870 


EUROPEAN    STATES    K\    1870      101 


same  time  that  they  despised  them  as  su})jeets  of  a  king, 
while  they  boasted  that  they  hved  in  a  re[)ul)lic  as  free 
men.  On  the  other  hand,  EngHshmen  thought  of  Ameri- 
cans as  ungrateful  colonists,  who  would  hear  none  of  the 
burdens  of  the  British  Empire,  and  who  had  ungratefully 
cast  off  their  allegiance  as  soon  as  they  could;  and  they 
looked  down  upon  them  as  rough  and  inferior  people  in  a 
new,  rude  country.  All  disputes  between  the  two  nations 
were  arranged  peaceably,  however,  after  1814,  and  slowly 
relations  became  better.  The  great  crisis  had  just  been 
reached  during  the  Civil  War,  when]  the  British  Govern- 
ment recognized  the  Confederacy  as  a  belligerent,  sym- 
pathizing with  its  cause  and  hoping  that  it  would  win 
independence.  Confederate  privateers  fitted  out  in  Eng- 
land swept  American  commerce  from  the  seas,  arousing 
great  bitterness  in  the  North  against  England.  Never- 
theless, a  great  part  of  the  middle  and  lower  classes  in 
Britain  earnestly  hoped  that  the  North  would  win,  and 
that  negro  slavery  would  be  abolished.  The  turning- 
point  came  when  the  war  ended  in  1865  with  the  complete 
triumph  of  the  North,  and  when  two  years  later  the  Elec- 
toral Reform  Law  of  18G7  made  the  Government  of  the 
United  Kingdom  much  more  of  a  government  by  its  people 
than  before.  Gradually  in  spirit  and  character  the 
governments  of  Britain  and  the  United  States  came  much 
closer  together.  The  American  Government  was  now 
asking  that  England  pay  for  the  damage  done  by  the 
Southern  privateers  fitted  out  in  English  ports,  and  the 
dispute  about  this  caused  relations  to  be  strained  and 
unpleasant;  but  the  Alabama  Claims  were  about  to  be 
adjusted  peaceably  a  little  later  (1871-2),  by  treaty  and 
arbitration,  perhaps  the  most  important  example  of 
such  settlement  of  a  difference  between  two  great  nations 
up  to  that  time. 

In  1870  the  leading  nation  on  the  Continent  of  Europe 
was  France,  who  had  recovered  the  position  she  had  so 


MutuaJ 

bitter 

feeling 


The  two 
peoples 
come  closer 
together 


The  position 
of  France 


102 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  leading 
Continental 
state 


Greatness 
and  down- 
faU 


Recovery 
of  strength 


long  held  as  the  principal  Continental  state.  During  the 
eighteenth  century,  despite  much  failure  and  incompetent 
administration,  she  had  held  this  position  generally,  be- 
cause she  contained  twice  as  many  energetic  and  highly 
civilized  people  as  any  other  well-organized  state  then. 
During  all  this  time  the  French  were  leaders  in  European 
civilization;  their  language  was  everywhere  known  or 
used  by  educated  people;  their  styles,  their  taste,  their 
manners  were  universally  imitated,  while  the  ideas  of 
their  philosophers  and  writers  about  social  and  economic 
matters  were  studied  with  enthusiasm  in  every  quarter. 

In  France  it  was  that  the  great  Revolution  began,  which 
in  the  western  half  of  Europe  swept  away  the  relics  of  the 
feudal  system,  bringing  many  civil  and  social  inequahties 
to  an  end.  Thence  spread  out  over  neighboring  lands 
ideas  about  political  equality  and  the  rights  of  man.  There 
was  built  up  the  stupendous  power  of  Napoleon.  For 
some  years  at  the  beginning  of  the  century  France  had 
been  the  center  of  the  greatest  empire  seen  for  ages,  and 
from  Paris  edicts  had  gone  forth  to  be  obeyed  from  War- 
saw unto  Madrid.  Then  came  the  collapse  of  the  Napo- 
leonic Empire,  and  with  it,  for  some  time,  the  end  of  the 
leadership  of  France.  The  French  emissary,  Talleyrand, 
was  soon  admitted  to  the  inner  circle  of  the  small  group  of 
great  men  who  decided  the  destinies  of  Europe  at  Vienna, 
but  the  settlement  of  1814-15  was  essentially  a  reversal 
of  much  of  what  France  had  accomplished  in  the  past 
generation.  When  Napoleon  staked  all  on  a  final  contest 
in  1813-14,  France  lost  the  "natural  frontiers,"  which  the 
Revolutionary  armies  had  won,  and  which  carried  her 
boundary  to  the  Rhine.  These  frontiers,  perhaps,  she 
might  have  retained  permanently  had  Napoleon  been 
wiUing  to  compromise  before  it  was  too  late. 

After  Waterloo  for  a  generation  or  more  France  was 
remembered  as  a  danger  to  the  other  nations  and  a  dis- 
turber of  the  peace  of  Europe;  and  for  some  time  she  was 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      103 


regarded  with  as  much  suspicion  as  defeated  Germany 
was  a  hundred  years  later.  During'  this  time  any  attempt 
to  alter  the  territorial  arrangements  made  at  \'ienna, 
perhaps  even  the  reestablishing  of  a  republic  in  France, 
would  almost  certainly  have  brought  the  French  into 
conflict  with  another  European  coalition.  It  was  the 
principal  service  of  the  French  kings  who  reigned  from 
1814  to  1848  that  they  kept  the  peace,  gradually  allayed 
the  suspicion  of  their  neighbors,  and  gave  the  country  time 
to  recover  from  the  exhaustion  which  the  years  preceding 
had  entailed.  In  1848  a  series  of  revolutions  shook  the 
power  of  the  conservative  statesmen  who  had  been 
standing  guard  since  Napoleon  went  to  St.  Helena,  and 
gradually  the  situation  altered.  A  second  republic  was 
established  in  France  in  1848,  succeeded  by  a  second  em- 
pire, under  the  nephew  of  the  great  Napoleon,  in  1852. 
Already  the  French  people,  because  of  the  inexhaustible 
fertility  of  their  soil,  because  of  a  rising  industrialism, 
and  most  of  all  as  a  result  of  their  own  energy  and  amazing 
recuperative  power,  had  fully  recovered  their  strength. 
The  emperor.  Napoleon  III,  parti}'  to  strengthen  his  own 
position,  soon  embarked  upon  an  ambitious  poHcy  in 
foreign  relations,  and  soon,  with  Britain  largely  holding 
aloof  from  European  affairs,  France  regained  her  old 
position  as  leader  among  the  European  nations.  In  1854 
France,  along  with  Great  Britain  and  afterward  Pied- 
mont, assisted  the  Turks  against  the  Russians  in  the  Cri- 
mean War;  and  the  Congress  which  followed  this  struggle 
was  held  at  Paris  to  make  the  treaty  which  brought  the 
conflict  to  an  end.  In  1859  Napoleon  assisted  the  Ruman- 
ians to  unite.  That  same  year  he  helped  the  Italians  to 
shake  off  Austria's  yoke,  thus  paving  the  way  for  Italian 
unity  also. 

Thereafter,  however,  French  foreign  policy  was  in- 
creasingly unsuccessful,  notably  in  the  attempt  to  control 
Mexico   and   in   efforts   to   extend   the   French   frontier 


Regarded 
with  much 
suspicion 


The  Second 
Empire 


France  and 
Germany 


104 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


French 

policy 

thwarted 


Political  and 
social  prog- 
ress 


Socialism 


toward  the  Rhine.  By  1870  Napoleon,  baffled  in  all  his 
recent  undertakings,  had  brought  France  to  the  point 
where  she  was  regarded  with  suspicion  by  most  of  the 
European  powers,  and  by  some  of  them  was  heartily  dis- 
liked. A  dangerous  discord  between  the  French  Empire 
and  the  new  North  German  Confederation  was  increasing 
each  year.  And  by  1870  many  people,  realizing  that 
Frenchmen  viewed  with  hostility  the  rise  of  a  new,  strong, 
united  Germany  at  their  borders,  and  that  a  multitude  of 
Germans  did  not  believe  their  national  unity  could  be 
completed  until  accounts  had  been  settled  with  France, 
considered  that  war  between  the  two  was  only  a  matter 
of  time. 

In  France  as  in  Great  Britain  there  had  been  much 
political  and  social  progress.  After  the  too-rapid  changes 
of  the  Revolution  reaction  had  come  first  under  Na- 
poleon I,  when  a  military  despotism  was  established, 
afterward  under  the  Bourbons  (1814-30).  But  even  with 
the  Restoration  in  1814  a  constitutional  government, 
modelled  on  that  of  England,  had  been  established,  and 
in  the  succeeding  period  this  government  was  made 
more  liberal  and  the  franchise  was  extended.  Political 
progress  had  recently  been  rapid,  and  in  1870  ministerial 
government  had  been  established  almost  as  it  existed  in 
England.  In  France,  as  across  the  Channel,  the  Indus- 
trial Revolution  had  brought  great  changes  and  large 
industrial  ex^pansion.  In  the  French  cities,  as  in  the 
English,  there  had  been  many  new  baffling  problems  and 
much  discontent  among  industrial  workers.  Socialism, 
which  had  its  roots  back  before  Revolutionary  times, 
had  developed  much  more  in  France  than  in  England,  and 
bodies  of  the  workers  awaited  their  opportunity  to  over- 
throw the  existing  system.  The  period  of  the  Terror  in 
1793-4  had  seen  efforts  of  radicals  to  bring  to  pass  a 
change  in  the  interests  of  the  masses  of  the  French  people. 
In  1848,  during  a  political  crisis,  the  workingmen  of  Paris 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      105 


under  socialist  leaders  had  attempted  to  brin^  about 
sweeping  reforms,  and,  when  thwarted,  rose  in  a  terrible 
revolt.  In  1870  no  such  danger  seemed  imminent,  but  in 
the  very  next  year,  after  the  disastrous  defeat  in  war  with 
the  Germans,  there  was  to  be  a  similar  revolt  in  the  Com- 
mune of  Paris.  Nevertheless,  this  radicalism  was  con- 
fined to  a  number  comparatively  small.  Since  the  Revo- 
lution the  rulers  of  France  had  been  the  bourgeoisie. 
Beyond  them  the  great  mass  of  the  people,  engaged  in  agri- 
culture, were  content  with  their  lot,  since  the  lands  of  the 
Church  and  the  nobles  had  been  sold  to  them  in  small 
holdings.  They  now  formed  with  the  bourgeoisie  the  great 
foundation  of  French  institutions. 

By  1870  central  Europe  had  undergone  such  great 
transformation  that  its  arrangement  was  altogether  dif- 
ferent from  what  it  had  been  two  generations,  even  one 
generation,  earlier.  At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth 
century  the  Germanic  people,  and  many  Slavs  whom  once 
they  had  conquered,  were  grouped  together  in  three 
hundred  and  thirty  divisions,  most  of  them  quite  small, 
some  of  respectable  size,  and  two,  Austria  and  Prussia, 
large  and  important  European  states.  Very  loosely  they 
were  then  bound  together  in  the  so-called  Holy  Roman 
Empire,  at  the  head  of  which  was  an  emperor,  the  ruler 
of  the  Hapsburg  or  Austrian  dominions.  This  Empire 
was  actually  not  bound  together  by  any  strong  or  effec- 
tively organized  government,  so  that  the  various  parts 
acted  much  as  they  pleased,  sometimes  in  unison,  some- 
times siding  with  foreign  enemies  against  other  members 
of  the  Reich. 

In  1806,  when  Napoleon  was  rearranging  central 
Europe  as  seemed  to  him  best,  the  venerable  Holy  Roman 
Empire  came  to  an  end,  its  Kaiser  taking  now  the  title 
of  emperor  of  Austria,  the  dominions  directly  subject  to 
his  rule,  while  the  various  German  states  were  not  any 
longer   bound    together    in    any    common    organization. 


Radicalism 
in  France 


Central 
Europe 


Holy  Roman 
Empire  and 
Germanic 
Confedera- 
tion 


106 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Ger- 
manic Con- 
federation, 
1815-66 


Halting 

progress 
toward  real 
union 


After  the  downfall  of  Napoleon,  however,  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  erected  the  Germanic  Confederation,  much  like 
the  old  Empire  which  had  disappeared,  since  the  various 
states  were  only  loosely  bound  together  as  before,  and 
since  the  Diet,  or  general  assembly,  which  was  provided, 
had  no  power  to  enforce  its  decisions.     The  spirit  of  na- 
tionality rising  then  in  central  Europe,  and  stronger  feeling 
of  common  possession  of  German  language  and  culture, 
made  many  Germans  yearn  for  a  real  union  of  the  various 
German   states  into  a  closely  united  federation  or  one 
great  national  state.     To  this,  however,  Metternich  and 
other  leading  statesmen  were  opposed.     Austria,  the  most 
powerful  of  the  states  in  question,  was  resolved  that  it 
should  not  come  to  pass,  since,  in  any  real  and  strong 
union  of  the  German  states,  Austria,  now  the  leader,  would 
almost  certainly  lose  her  position  of  leadership,  for  the 
greater   part   of   her   extended   dominions   was   peopled 
not  by  Germans  but  by  subject  Magyars,  Rumans,  and 
Slavs.     Nevertheless,  much  had  really  been  accomplished 
toward  attaining  the  unity  for  which  German  patriots 
were  yearning.     "Germany"  was  not  so  divided  as  before 
Napoleon's  time.     When  his  work  was  done  there   re- 
mained only  thirty-eight  German  states,  several  of  them 
of  considerable  size. 

During  the  generation  which  followed  1815  little 
progress  seemed  to  be  made.  The  system  of  Metternich 
prevailed,  and  his  system  was  opposed  to  German  unity 
and  to  any  liberal  constitutional  progress.  Gradually, 
however,  the  beginning  of  the  Industrial  Revolution  in 
central  Europe  and  the  changing  times  undermined  his 
power,  until  in  1848  a  series  of  revolutions  brought  his 
regime  to  an  end.  Uprisings  of  the  people  in  Prussia, 
in  Austria,  in  Hungary,  and  in  other  states,  yielded  reform 
and  constitutions  temporarily,  and  the  most  ardent  Ger- 
man liberals  even  believed  for  the  moment  that  the  time 
had   come  when   it  was   possible  to  establish  a  united 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      107 


German  nation  at  last.  At  Frankfort  a  parliament 
assembled  to  try  to  bring  this  about,  but  reaction  soon 
undid  the  work  which  the  revolutions  had  accomplished, 
and  the  work  of  the  Parliament  came  to  nothing.  By 
1850  the  loose  and  ineffective  Germanic  Confederation 
was  restored. 

Meanwhile,  to  a  great  extent  unnoticed  then,  economic 
ties  were  binding  large  parts  of  Germany  together.  Be- 
tween 1818  and  1842,  excepting  Austria  and  Hanover,  all 
of  the  German  states  joined  a  customs  union,  the  Zoll- 
verein.  At  the  head  of  the  antiquated  Germanic  Con- 
federation was  Austria,  apparently  still  the  most  powerful 
of  all  the  members;  but  the  Zollverein  was  headed  by 
Prussia,  whose  strength  was  constantly  increasing,  and 
whom  more  and  more  the  smaller  German  states  were 
beginning  to  regard  as  their  leader.  For  some  time  she 
had  been  steadily  building  up  her  military  power,  and  now 
she  prepared  to  dispute  with  Austria  for  the  leadership 
in  Germany.  Relations  between  the  two  steadily  became 
worse,  and  were  designedly  made  worse  by  the  great 
Prussian  leader,  Bismarck,  until  the  matter  came  to  issue 
in  the  Austro-Prussian  War  in  1866.  In  this  conflict  the 
Prussians  had  just  won  complete  triumph;  they  had  an- 
nexed much  neighboring  German  territory  to  their  pos- 
sessions, dissolved  the  old  Germanic  Confederation,  ex- 
pelled Austria  from  any  association  with  the  other  Ger- 
man states,  and  out  of  the  German  states  north  of  the 
river  Main  they  had  formed  the  new,  powerful  North 
German  Confederation  (1867).  Thus  was  brought  to 
pass  what  German  patriots  and  statesmen  had  been  dream- 
ing of  for  ages,  a  Germany  strong'  and  united.  The  work 
was  not  yet  complete,  but  Bismarck  was  already  plan- 
ning to  bring  the  south  German  states  into  a  larger  Ger- 
man union.  Actually  the  appearance  of  this  new,  strong 
German  state  in  the  midst  of  the  older  European  states 
had  disturbed  the  older  balance  of  power,  and  equilibrium 


Partial 
union  under 
Prussia 


The  Nord- 
deutsches 
Bund,  1867 


108 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Austria  and 
Hungary 


Peoples 

of  the 

Hapsburg 

dominions 


had  not  yet  been  adjusted.  In  after  times  it  seemed  a 
pity  that  German  unity  had  not  been  brought  about 
peaceably,  if  that  were  possible,  by  the  x-epublicans  and 
liberals  of  Germany  in  1848;  for  what  had  so  far  been 
achieved  had  largely  been  completed  by  Bismarck's  genius 
and  guile,  and  wrought  by  Prussian  military  might. 

In  1870  what  had  been  the  Austrian  Empire  had  re- 
cently become  the  Empire  of  Austria  and  the  Kingdom 
of  Hungary  united  by  a  compromise,  the  Ausgleich,  as 
the  Dual  Monarchy  (1867).  In  the  Middle  Ages,  when 
the  Germans  were  pushing  eastward  and  southward  at 
the  expense  of  the  Slavs,  one  of  the  principal  border  com- 
munities had  been  the  East  Mark  (eastern  frontier  state), 
later  known  as  the  East  Kingdom,  Oesterreich,  Austria. 
In  course  of  time  its  rulers,  the  Hapsburgs,  by  fortunate 
marriages,  by  skilful  diplomacy,  and  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries  by  successful  wars  against  the 
waning  power  of  the  Turk,  had  enlarged  their  dominions, 
until  the  great  majority  of  the  people  subject  to  their 
rule  were  not  Germans  but  Magyars  and  Southern  Slavs. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  Austria  and 
Hungary  were  the  two  principal  parts  of  the  Hapsburg 
dominions.  In  Austria  the  principal  element  of  the 
population  was  the  Germans,  who  were  the  ruling  class, 
and  most  powerful  and  wealthy;  but  the  majority  of  the 
inhabitants  were  the  Czechs  (West  Slavs)  of  Bohemia  and 
Moravia,  the  Poles  (West  Slavs)  of  Galicia,  and  the  South 
Slavs  of  the  country  along  the  east  shore  of  the  Adriatic 
and  inward.  In  Hungary  the  principal  element  of  the 
population  was  the  Magyars,  who  had  once  made  the 
Kingdom  of  Hungary;  but  they  were  less  than  half  of 
the  entire  population,  the  remaining  inhabitants  being 
the  South  Slavs  of  Croatia-Slavonia,  and  the  Rumanians 
of  Transylvania.  Thus,  Austria  with  Hungary  had  been 
a  German  state  for  the  most  part  only  because  it  was 
governed  by  Germans,  and  it  was  owing  to  the  heteroge- 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      109 


neity  of  its  population  and  its  non-Germanic  character 
that  during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  Aus- 
tria gradually  seemed  less  and  less  the  natural  leader  of 
the  German  states.  During  the  Revolution  of  1818  the 
various  subject  peoples  hoped  they  might  win  their  free- 
dom; and  for  a  while  it  looked  as  though  Hungary  would 
obtain  virtual  independence;  hut  in  llicend  the  Austrians, 
with  the  help  of  Russia,  had  subdued  tliem  all,  and  it 
seemed  that  Hapsburg  power  was  once  more  completely 
established. 

Actually,  however,  the  subject  peoples,  especially  tlie 
Magyars,  were  burning  with  a  sense  of  their  own  national- 
ity, and  waiting  for  another  opportunity  to  throw  off  the 
yoke.  Then  Austria  was  unsuccessful  in  her  foreign  rela- 
tions, being  defeated  by  France  in  18o9,  and  presently 
in  1866,  suffering  disastrous  defeat  at  the  hands  of  the 
Prussians.  In  the  midst  of  this  failure  abroad  and  sullen 
discontent  at  home  it  was  necessary  to  make  some  new  ar- 
rangement. Accordingly,  in  1867,  by  the  Ausgleich,  the 
Austrians  came  to  a  good  understanding  with  the  most 
powerful  of  the  discontented  peoples,  the  Magyars.  The 
Dual  Monarchy  now  established  was  to  be  a  union  of  an 
Austria  and  a  Hungary,  substantially  equal;  with  the 
Germans,  the  minority  in  Austria,  controlling  affairs 
there,  and  the  ^Magyars,  less  than  half  of  the  population 
of  Hungary,  controlling  affairs  in  that  part.  So  the 
two  most  powerful  minorities  united  to  keep  the  rest  in 
subjection.  This  arrangement  was  now  working  well, 
and  Austria-Hungary  was  starting  forward  again  on  the 
road  of  prosperity  and  advancement.  The  others,  Slavs 
and  Rumans,  could  not  yet  make  themselves  heard,  and 
only  dreamed  of  their  day  which  might,  perhaps,  come  in 
the  future. 

To  the  east  of  the  Central  Powers  lay  the  vast  Russian 
Empire,  stretching  for  seven  thousand  miles,  from  the 
Carpathian  Mountains  to  the  Pacific  coast  of  northeast 


The  Aus- 
gleich :  a 
Dual  Mon- 
archy 


The  Russian 
Empire 


110 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Growth  of 

the  power 
of  Russia 


Condition  of 
the  people  in 
Russia 


Asia,  embracing  all  the  great  plain  of  the  eastern  half  of 
Europe,  and  beyond  the  Ural  Mountains,  all  the  north 
part  of  Asia.     Some  far-reaching  and  fundamental  re- 
forms had  just  been  made  in  Russia,  but  down  to  within  a 
decade  of  1870  the  condition  of  the  Russian  people  had 
changed  but  little  in  many  generations.     For  a  long  time 
the  history  of  this  part  of  the  world  had  had  to  do  mostly 
with  the  expansion  of  the  Great  Russian  race,  one  of  the 
parts  of  the  Northern  Slavs,  from  the  district  about  Mos- 
cow, where  their  power  first  arose.     To  the  east  and  the 
south  they  had  gone,  until  in  the  course  of  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries  they  had  built  up  a  great  inland 
Muscovite  state,  and  sent  forth  colonists  and  traders  to 
take  the  Siberian  country  in  Asia.     Meanwhile  to  the  west 
they  had  come  into  contact  with  the  Poles,  previously  the 
leading  Slavic  people.     During  the  eighteenth   century 
they  took  what  they  wished  from  their  neighbors  to  the 
west:     Baltic  provinces  from  Sweden  in  the  north,  terri- 
tory from  Turks  and  Tartars  in  the  south,  and  most  of 
Poland,  when  it  was  partitioned  (1772,  1793,  1795).     At 
the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  Russians 
had  held  their  own  against  Napoleon,  and  at  the  Congress 
of  Vienna  the  tsar  had  been  looked  upon  as  the  mightiest 
ruler  in  Europe. 

The  great  French  ideas  of  the  Revolution  and  Napo- 
leon's time  scarcely  even  touched  Russia,  whose  people 
remained  unreached  by  the  influences  that  so  profoundly 
altered  life  in  the  western  half  of  the  Continent.  The 
government  was  an  autocracy,  with  all  the  power  of  Church 
and  State  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  the  ruler,  the  tsar, 
while  administration  was  actually  carried  on  by  a  bureau- 
cracy of  numerous  officials  appointed  by  him  and  respon- 
sible to  him.  There  was  a  small  upper  class  of  nobles, 
many  of  them  poor  and  without  much  power.  There  was 
a  small  bourgeoisie,  so  scanty  as  compared  with  the  vast 
numbers  in  the  realm  as  scarcely  to  have  any  weight. 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      HI 


Beneath  was  the  great  mass  of  the  nation,  the  peasants, 
living  in  their  lonely  and  dirty  little  villages  in  the  forest 
and  over  the  plains,  carrying  on  a  primitive  agriculture, 
devoted  adherents  of  the  Greek  Catholic  or  Orthodox 
faith,  living  in  village  communities  and  bound  in  serfdom, 
much  as  the  peasants  of  western  Europe  had  lived  two  or 
three  centuries  before.  Few  of  these  people  could  read  or 
write.  Most  of  them  had  the  intellectual  outlook  of 
medieval  peasants.  Save  in  the  petty  concerns  of  their 
villages  none  of  them  had  aught  to  do  with  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country  or  any  control  over  it.  Many  of 
them  were  oppressed  by  the  judges  and  officials.  For 
most  of  them  life  was  hard  and  poverty-stricken,  lonely, 
meager,  and  bare. 

Generally  the  rulers  of  Russia  had  been  conservative 
and  intensely  desirous  of  retaining  autocratic  power  and 
established  position.  For  a  while  Alexander  I  (1801-1825) 
had  tried  to  act  as  a  liberal,  but  his  successor,  Nicholas  I 
(1825-1855),  had  been  thoroughly  reactionary,  and  re- 
solved that  none  of  the  dangerous  doctrines  recently  risen 
in  the  west  should  enter  his  country.  He  and  others 
of  the  ruling  class  of  Russia,  as  was  afterward  the  case, 
were  firmly  resolved  to  maintain  the  power  and  privileges 
of  their  ruling  class;  but  they  were  also  anxious  to  keep 
unchanged  Russian  institutions,  Russian  character,  and 
the  Russian  religion,  which  they  considered  to  be  superior 
to  all  others.  During  the  lifetime  of  Nicholas  I  w^estcrn 
and  radical  ideas  had  been  almost  completely  kept  out 
of  Russia,  through  repression,  censorship,  and  the  unceas- 
ing vigilance  of  spies  and  pohce.  Meanwhile,  there  was 
not  only  no  progress  in  the  country,  but  deterioration  and 
decay  set  in,  while  the  government  became  constantly 
more  corrupt  and  inefficient.  So  long  as  Russia  was  con- 
sidered invincible  in  war  it  was  possible  to  uphold  this 
system,  but  during  the  Crimean  War  (1854-6)  Russian 
armies  were  shamefully  defeated,  and  it  was  evident  that 


The  Russian 
peasants 


The  govern- 
ment of 
Russia 


112  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

the  people's  discontent  with  evil  conditions  and  poor  ad- 
ministration at  length  would  have  to  be  appeased. 
The  great  During  the  war  a  new  tsar,  Alexander  II  (1855-1881), 

had  come  to  the  throne.  At  once  he  undertook  great 
reforms.  By  the  abolition  of  serfdom  (1859-1866)  the 
peasants  were  relieved  of  manorial  obligations,  made  com- 
pletely free,  and  given  part  of  the  lands  on  which  they  had 
'  worked.  In  1864  the  judicial  system  was  reformed, 
jury  trial  and  western  principles  being  introduced.  At  the 
same  time  larger  rights  of  local  self-government  were 
granted  in  the  rural  divisions,  and,  in  1870,  also  in  the 
cities.  But  by  that  time  the  reform  movement  in  Russia 
had  come  to  an  end.  On  the  one  hand  there  was  reaction 
because  the  upper  class  believed  that  too-great  innovations 
had  been  made.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  great  dis- 
illusion and  disappointment  on  the  part  of  numerous 
simple  people  who  had  expected  everything  to  be  re- 
formed, but  who  at  once  discovered  much  of  evil  still  re- 
maining. Whether  in  the  realm  of  the  tsars  the  great 
changes  which  had  come  over  western  Europe  could  be 
brought  about  peaceably  in  course  of  time  or  only  by  force 
and  revolution — all  this  lay  hid  in  the  future. 
The  King-  In  Italy  as  in  Germany  a  great  alteration  of  affairs  had 

dom  of  recently  taken  place.     After  centuries  of  weakness,  divi- 

^^^^^  sion,  and  subjection,  the  Italian  people  had  been  united 

in  one  nation,  and  almost  all  of  the  peninsula  had  been 
brought  together  in  the  lungdom  of  Italy.  By  1870  the 
process  was  nearly  complete,  and,  indeed,  later  in  that 
very  year  the  last,  crowning  part  of  the  work  would  be 
done.  Italians  then  were  in  the  midst  of  the  grand  part 
of  their  modern  history,  thrilling  with  patriotism,  their 
hearts  warm  with  new  sense  of  dignity,  greatness,  and 
success.  In  1870,  however,  a  great  part  of  all  the  people 
then  living  could  remember  when  Italians  were  not  only 
divided  among  several  small  states,  as  the  Germans  had 
been,  but  when  some  of  them  had  been  in  subjection  to 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      113 


forcif^n  masters,  and  almost  all  of  the  others  ruled  by 
despots  dependent  ui)on  foreign  masters. 

During  the  Middle  Ages,  when  nation  states  were 
being  built  up  in  England,  in  France,  and  in  Spain,  out  of 
the  smaller  fragments  in  which  these  countries  were  i)re- 
viously  divided,  in  Italy  the  spirit  of  localism  was  so  strong, 
and  such  striking  and  brilliant  individuality  developed 
in  different  places,  that  for  some  time  the  peninsula 
was  crowded  with  small  city-states,  much  as  old  Greece 
once  had  been.  During  all  this  time  there  were  efforts 
to  consolidate  these  fragments  into  larger  jurisdictions; 
but  every  effort  to  accomplish  any  Italian  unity  was 
brought  to  nothing,  partly  because  the  German  emperors 
of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  always  attempted  to  keep 
Italy  a  part  of  their  dominions,  and  even  more  because  the 
popes  at  Rome,  wishing  to  be  the  most  important  sover- 
eigns in  the  country,  thwarted  all  attempts  to  make  one, 
united  Italian  nation.  Later  on,  when  the  Italians 
were  conquered  by  foreign  powers,  Italy  was  only  a  geo- 
graphical expression,  as  Metternich  said  some  centuries 
later,  and  the  Italian  people  remained  divided  among 
divers  small  states.  During  the  sixteenth  and  seven- 
teenth centuries  they  were  ruled  by  the  pope,  by  the 
Spaniards,  and  by  princes  under  the  shadow  of  Spain. 
In  the  eighteenth  century  the  power  of  Spain  was  suc- 
ceeded by  the  dominion  of  Austria.  During  the  French 
Revolution  the  Austrian  masters  were  expelled,  but  Italy 
was  soon  made  a  part  of  the  empire  which  Napoleon  con- 
structed. The  Napoleonic  era,  along  with  much  suffering, 
brought  a  great  deal  of  good,  since  the  previous  smaller 
divisions  were  now  consolidated  into  three  large  parts, 
and  among  the  people  feeling  of  nationality  was  awakened. 
The  Congress  of  Vienna,  when  it  rearranged  European 
affairs,  had  ignored  the  aspirations  of  the  Italian  people 
even  as  it  disregarded  those  of  the  Germans.  The  north 
part  of  the  country,  around  INlilan  and  Venice,  was  left  an 


Italy  in 
earlier  times 


Italian  na-^ 

tionality 

thwarted 


114 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Risorgi- 
mento 


The  unifica- 
tion of  Italy 


Austrian  province,  and  all  the  remainder,  divided  in  parts 
as  before,  was  ruled  by  sovereigns  subservient  to  the 
Austrian  power. 

In  vain  had  a  secret  society,  the  Carbonari,  endeavored 
to  throw  off  the  foreigner's  yoke.  In  vain  the  patriots 
rose  to  get  reform  and  independence;  always  the  move- 
ments were  easily  crushed  by  the  superior  Austrian  power. 
Nevertheless,  during  all  this  time  a  Risorgimento  (resurrec- 
tion) had  been  going  on,  under  the  leadership  of  various 
aspiring  men,  chief  among  whom  was  Mazzini,  who 
founded  the  society  Giovine  Italia  (Young  Italy),  placing 
his  hopes  in  the  youth  of  the  land.  During  this  stirring 
of  mind  the  Italian  people  were  taught  to  consider  them- 
selves as  one  nation,  with  one  language  and  common 
traditions,  heirs  of  a  glorious  past,  and  destined  to  have 
happiness  and  glory  once  more  when  unity  would  be 
achieved  in  the  future. 

The  establishment  of  the  Italian  nation  was  brought 
about  under  the  leadership  of  the  north  Italian  state  of 
Piedmont  (Sardinia),  and  was  due,  above  all  others,  to  the 
consummate  leadership  of  the  Italian  statesman  Cavour. 
With  great  skill  he  obtained  the  assistance  of  France, 
and  then  in  a  war  with  Austria  (1859)  Lombardy,  part  of 
Austria's  possessions,  was  conquered.  Fired  with  en- 
thusiasm the  people  of  the  adjoining  states  expelled 
their  princelings,  and  despite  the  opposition  of  France,  the 
states  were  permitted  to  join  with  the  greater  Piedmont, 
so  that  most  of  the  northern  half  of  Italy  was  free  and 
united.  Next  year  Garibaldi,  an  Italian  patriot  and 
exile,  led  an  expedition  into  Sicily  and  Naples,  and  easily 
conquered  all  the  southern  half  of  the  peninsula,  yielding 
all  this  country  at  once  to  the  king  of  Piedmont.  In 
1861  the  Kingdom  of  Italy  was  proclaimed,  embracing  the 
entire  peninsula  excepting  Venetia  and  the  city  of  Rome 
with  a  small  domain  about  it.  In  1866  Italy,  joining 
Prussia  against  Austria,  obtained  Venetia  as  her  reward. 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      115 


In  1870  a  French  garrison  was  still  holding  Rome  for 
the  pope,  but  the  Italian  people  were  hoping  that  some 
day  the  old  capital  of  the  country  would  become  the 
capital  of  their  new  state. 

In  southern  Europe,  at  the  western  and  the  eastern 
extremities,  were  two  states,  once  great  but  now  in  decline 
and  decay.  At  the  western  gateway  of  the  Mediterran- 
ean was  Spain,  with  grandeur  departed  and  glory  gone. 
In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  she  had  for  a 
while  been  the  greatest  power  in  the  world,  dominating 
much  of  western  and  central  Europe,  and  in  possession 
of  the  greatest  commerce  and  the  most  extensive  and 
wealthiest  colonial  empire  which  the  world  ever  had  seen. 
But  poverty  of  natural  resources  in  Spain,  emigration  of 
the  best  Spaniards  to  the  colonies  in  America,  expulsion 
of  Moorish  artisans  and  Jewish  business  men,  and  religi- 
ous intolerance  which  forbade  much  intellectual  activity, 
soon  brought  decline.  Subject  provinces  in  Europe  were 
lost,  Spanish  armies  were  defeated,  and  Spain  ceased 
to  be  leader  in  Europe.  At  the  beginning  of  the  eighteenth 
century  a  great  European  war  was  fought  concerning  the 
possessions  of  Spain,  and  in  1713  the  Spanish  dominions 
in  Italy  and  the  Netherlands  were  lost.  The  vast  colonial 
empire  remained  for  another  hundred  years,  but  more  and 
more  the  trade  passed  to  the  Enghsh.  Then,  in  the  ear- 
lier years  of  the  nineteenth  century,  save  for  some  islands 
in  the  Caribbean,  all  of  the  American  possessions  of  Spain 
won  their  complete  independence. 

During  the  French  Revolution  the  Spaniards  were  some- 
what affected  by  the  new  ideas,  and  in  Napoleon's  time 
many  reforms  were  made  in  their  country,  but  the  na- 
tional uprising  there  against  Napoleon's  power  was  fol- 
lowed by  a  period  of  reaction.  Thereafter  during  the 
nineteenth  century  the  history  of  Spain  had  been  con- 
cerned with  a  succession  of  struggles  between  a  minority 
of  liberals,  who  would  bring  reform,  and  the  majority  of 


Spain  in  the 
past 


During  the 

French 

Revolution 


116  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

In  1870  the  nation,   conservative  or  ignorant  and   superstitious, 

while  tlie  country  was  also  torn  by  strife  betw^een  rival 
claimants  to  the  throne.  In  1870,  indeed,  the  throne  was 
vacant,  as  the  result  of  a  revolution,  and  the  Spanish 
leaders  were  seeking  a  new  sovereign  throughout  Europe. 
The  fundamental  cause  of  the  lowly  position  in  which  the 
Spanish  people  now  found  themselves  was  that  world- 
conditions  had  altered :  other  nations  possessed  greater  re- 
sources and  had  become  relatively  richer  and  greater; 
change  of  the  principal  trade  routes  had  left  Spaniards 
more  outside  the  world's  greatest  affairs;  while  the  coal 
and  iron  which  were  making  some  industrial  nations  great 
whereto  no  large  extent  available  in  Spain. 
The  Otto-  At  the  other  end  of  the  Mediterranean  were  the  relics 

man  Empire  ^^  ^^le  Ottoman  Empire,  extending  from  Constantinople 
up  through  the  Balkans,  and  down  across  the  Bosporus 
through  Asia  Minor,  into  Mesopotamia,  into  Palestine, 
and  nominally  around  the  north  African  shore,  through 
Tripoli  and  Egypt.  It  was  still  great  in  size,  but  its 
power  and  its  strength  had  departed.  The  Turks,  like 
the  Hungarians  and  the  Finns,  were  alien  intruders  in 
Europe.  In  the  fourteenth  century  they  had  crossed 
into  Europe  from  Anatolia,  in  Asia  Minor,  w^here  already 
they  had  laid  the  foundations  of  their  state.  In  1453 
they  captured  Constantinople  and  by  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, if  they  were  not  the  greatest  power  in  Europe, 
they  were  yet  so  powerful  as  to  menace  all  of  their 
neighbors.  All  the  eastern  Mediterranean  as  well  as  the 
Black  Sea  was  held  firmly  in  their  grip,  and  their  Euro- 
pean boundaries  were  pushed  up  as  far  as  the  Danube. 
Brave  as  warriors  and  essentially  a  military  nation,  the 
developing  civilization  of  western  Europe  presently  left 
them  behind,  and  they  were  no  longer  able  to  wage  war 
with  Christian  states,  which  possessed  superior  organiza- 
tion and  equipment.  In  1571  they  were  defeated  in  the 
great  naval  battle  of  Lepanto;  and  in  1683  before  the 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      117 


walls  of  Vienna.  Accordingly  their  conquests  came  to  an 
end,  and  their  outlying  provinces  began  to  fall  away. 
Furthermore,  they  had  never  developed  any  good  political 
organization,  so  that  their  empire  merely  consisted  of  a 
conglomeration  of  different  subject  peoples,  oppressed 
and  debased,  but  retaining  their  own  religion,  speech,  and 
racial  consciousness.  Among  these  subjects  the  Turkish 
conquerors  lived — a  minority  of  the  entire  population — 
keeping  their  position  by  force  and  by  maintaining  the 
differences  between  the  various  bodies  of  their  subjects. 

The  condition  of  the  subject  majority  in  the  European 
dominions  of  Turkey  was  extremely  bad.  This  was  not 
so  much  because  of  the  cruelty  and  wickedness  of  the 
Turks  as  from  their  lack  of  administrative  ability  and 
genius  to  govern  wisely  and  well.  Moreover,  it  was 
probably  not  much  worse  than  the  condition  of  most  of 
the  peasants  in  the  Hapsburg  dominions  and  in  Russia. 
None  the  less,  the  Christian  population  of  Greece  and  the 
Balkans  yearned  for  their  freedom,  and  a  succession 
of  revolts  brought  them  independence  in  whole  or  in 
part.  Already  the  Greeks,  with  the  assistance  of  the 
great  Christian  powders,  had  achieved  their  independence, 
while  the  Serbs  and  the  Rumanians  had  won  autonomy 
under  overlordship  of  the  sultan.  Long  before  1870 
Turkey  would  probably  have  been  extinguished  by  a 
Russian  conquest,  had  it  not  been  for  the  opposition  first 
of  Great  Britain,  afterward  of  Austria  and  Britain.  In 
the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Ottoman  Em- 
pire had  seemed  to  Montesquieu  as  a  sick  man,  and 
afterward  its  end  was  often  predicted  and  expected. 
Many  believed  that  it  would  be  a  blessing  if  this  came  to 
pass.  "As  a  matter  of  humanity  I  wish  with  all  my  soul," 
said  Stratford  Canning  in  1821,  "that  the  Sultan  were 
driven  bag  and  baggage  into  the  heart  of  Asia." 
During  all  this  time,  however,  the  failing  power  of  the 
Turk  was  effectively  protected  by  the  jealousies  of  the 


The  waning 
of  the 
crescent 


Condition  of 
the  subject 
peoples 


118 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  smaller 
states 


The  neutral- 
ized states 


great  European  states.  This  had  just  been  strikingly 
shown.  Russia  under  Tsar  Nicholas  I  aspired,  apparently, 
to  get  possession  of  Constantinople,  long  desired  by  the 
Russians,  and  so  obtain  for  Russia  a  better  outlet  on  the 
great  seas  of  the  world.  Against  her  France  and  England 
had  fought  the  Crimean  War  (1854-6),  defeating  her  and 
saving  Turkey  from  destruction. 

In  1870  the  smaller  states  of  Europe  were  going  forward, 
some  in  quiet  prosperity,  under  the  shadow  of  their 
mightier  neighbors.  Greece  was  poor  and  small,  but 
independent,  and  developing  her  commerce,  as  of  old.  In 
the  Balkans  some  of  the  Christian  peoples,  like  the  Bul- 
gars,  still  were  ruled  by  the  Turk;  others,  like  the  Serbs 
and  the  Rumanians,  had  their  autonomy,  and  were  expect- 
ing more  complete  independence  in  the  future.  The  Scan- 
dinavian countries,  once  the  source  of  so  much  terror  and 
power,  were  now  outside  the  current  of  mightier  affairs, 
their  scanty  resources  not  having  permitted  development 
like  that  which  had  come  to  their  neighbors  to  the  south. 
Denmark  was  small  and  unimportant,  and  had  recently 
lost  her  two  southern  provinces,  Schleswig  and  Holstein 
(1864).  The  Congress  of  Vienna  had  given  Norway  to 
Sweden,  in  place  of  Finland,  long  a  Swedfsh  possession, 
but  taken  by  Russia  in  1809,  so  that  Norway  and  Sweden, 
different  as  they  were  in  the  character  of  their  peoples, 
and  in  economic  development,  were  ruled  by  one  king. 
Holland,  though  dispossessed  of  some  of  her  colonies  during 
the  Revolutionary  and  Napoleonic  wars,  still  had  one 
of  the  wealthiest  colonial  empires,  and  was  prosperous 
through  agriculture  and  commerce.  The  remaining  three 
states  had  recently  been  neutralized,  Switzerland  in  1815, 
Belgium  in  1831,  and  Luxemburg  in  1867,  thus  giving 
them,  it  was  hoped,  security  and  peace,  and  at  the  same 
time  putting  them  outside  the  greater  currents  of  Euro- 
pean politics.  The  Belgians,  since  their  successful  re- 
volt from  Holland  in  1830,  and  the  establishment  of  a 


europp:an  states  in  isto     no 

Belgian  state  by  the  Great  Powers  in  1831,  had  gone  for- 
ward greatly  in  industrial  prosperity  and  wealth.  Previ-  The  Swiss 
ous  to  1848  the  Swiss  people  had  been  united  in  a  loose  con-  Republic 
federation.  In  that  year  civil  war  broke  out,  when  the 
Sonderbund,  an  organization  of  the  more  conservative 
cantons,  tried  to  leave  the  others.  This  secession  was 
prevented,  and  in  the  same  year  a  new  constitution  was 
adopted,  making  of  the  Swiss  communities  a  strong,  com- 
pact federal  union. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland:  the  best 
of  the  shorter  works  for  detailed  reading  is  A.  L.  Cross,  A  His- 
tory of  England  and  Greater  Britain  (1914).  The  best  general 
history  of  England  is  the  cooperative  work,  The  Political  His- 
tory of  England,  edited  by  the  Rev.  William  Hunt  and  R.  L. 
Poole,  12  vols.  (1905-10).  For  the  later  period.  Sir  Spencer 
Walpole,  History  of  England  Since  1815,  6  vols,  (revised  edition, 
1902-5),  based  on  thorough  study  of  contemporary  accounts. 
For  the  government  of  England:  A.  L.  Lowell,  The  Government 
of  England,  2  vols.  (ed.  1912),  best;  Sir  William  Anson,  The 
Law  and  Custom  of  the  Constitution,  3  vols.  (ed.  1907-9) ;  Walter 
Bagehot,  The  English  Constitution  (ed.  1911);  A.  V.  Dicey, 
Introduction  to  the  Study  of  the  Law  of  the  Constitution  (8th  ed. 
1915);  Sidney  Low,  The  Governance  of  England  (ed.  1914);  Sir 
Courtney  Ilbert,  Parliament  (1911). 

France :  the  best  and  most  important  work  on  the  period  be- 
fore 1789  is  the  great  cooperative  work  edited  by  E.  Lavisse, 
Histoire  de  France  depuis  les  Origines  jusqu^a  la  Revolution,  9  vols. 
in  18  (1900-10).  For  the  later  period  the  most  important  work, 
also  edited  by  Lavisse,  is  now  appearing:  Histoire  de  France 
Contemporaine,  to  be  complete  in  10  vols.,  covering  the  period 
from  1789,  vols.  I,  II  (1920);  another  important  work  is  the 
cooperative  history  edited  by  Jean  Jaures,  Histoire  Socialiste, 
1789-1900,  12  vols.  (1901-9),  the  different  volumes  written  by 
prominent  French  socialists.  Also  Pierre  de  la  Gorce,  Histoire 
de  la  Seconde  Republique  Franqaise,  2  vols.  (7th  ed.  1914),  His- 
toire du  Second  Empire,  7  vols.  (4th  ed.  1896-1905),  from  the  cleri- 
cal point  of  view;  Henry  Houssaye,  1815,  3  vols.  (1896-1905); 
Blanchard  Jerrold,  The  Life  of  Napoleon  III,  4  vols.  (1874-82), 


KO  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

sympathetic;  L.  ISIichon,  Le  Goiivernemeiit  Parlementaire  sous  la 
Restauration  (1905);  Emile  Ollivier,  UEmpire  Libiral,  17  vols. 
(1895-1014);  Georges  Weill,  La  France  sous  la  Monarchie  Con- 
siihiiioncUc,  lSU-18^8  (1912). 

'  The  Germanies  and  Prussia:  Ernst  Berner,  Geschichte  des 
Preiissischen  Staates  (2d  ed.  1896);  W.  H.  Dawson,  The  German 
Empire:  1867-1914,  2  vols.  (1919);  E.  Denis,  La  Fondation 
de  VEmpire  Allemand,  1852-1871  (1906);  K.  T.  von  Heigel, 
Deutsche  Geschichte  vom  Tode  Friedrichs  des  Grossen  bis  zur 
Auflosimg  des  Alten  Reiches,  2  vols.  (1899-1911);  Heinrich  von 
Sybel,  Die  Begrundnng  des  Deutschen  Reiches  dutch  Wilhelm  I, 
7  vols.  (1889-90),  trans,  by  M.  L.  Perrin  and  Gamaliel  Brad- 
ford, 7  vols.  (1890-8);  Heinrich  von  Treitschke,  Deutsche 
Geschichte  im  Neunzehnten  Jahrhundert,  5  vols.  (3d  ed.  1895), 
from  the  period  of  the  French  Revolution,  brilliantly  written, 
strongly  nationalist,  hostile  to  the  liberals,  trans,  by  E.  and  C. 
Paul,  Vols.  I-VII  (1915-19);  H.  von  Zwiedineck-SUdenhorst, 
Deutsche  Geschichte  von  der  Auflbsung  des  Alten  his  zur  Errichtung 
des  Neuen  Kaiserreiches  (1806-1871),  3  vols.  (1897-1905). 

The  Holy  Roman  Empire,  Austria,  and  Austria-Hungary: 
Archdeacon  William  Coxe,  History  of  the  House  of  Austria  from 
1218  to  1792  (many  editions);  Heinrich  Friedjung,  Oesterreich 
V(m  1848  bis  1860,  2  vols.  (1908-12),  best  for  the  period,  Der 
Kampf  um  die  Vorherrschaft  in  Deutschland,  1859  bis  1866,  2 
vols.  (6th  ed.  1904-5);  Franz  Krones,  Handbuch  der  Geschichte 
Oesterreichs,  5  vols.  (1876-9);  P.  M.  Leger,  Histoire  de  VAutriche- 
Hongrie,  depuis  les  Origines  jusqua  VAnnee  1878  (1879),  trans. 
by  Mrs.  B.  Hill  (1889). 

Russia:  the  best  book  to  give  the  beginner  an  acquaintance 
wnth  the  Russian  people  and  their  life  is  Sir  D.  M.  Wallace, 
Russia  (ed.  1912).  The  best  recent  work  in  English  on  Russian 
history  is  Raymond  Beazley,  Nevill  Forbes,  and  G.  A.  Birkett, 
Russia,  from  the  Varangians  to  the  Bolsheviks  (1918).  The  older 
standard  work  is  Alfred  Rambaud,  Histoire  de  la  Russie  depuis 
les  Origines  jusqua  Nos  Jours  (6th  ed.  completed  to  1913  by  E. 
Haumant,  3  vols.  1914),  English  trans.,  3  vols.  (1881).  Also 
V.  O.  Kliuchevsky,  abridged  and  trans,  by  C.  J.  Hogarth,  A 
History  of  Russia,  3  vols.  (1911-13),  best  account  of,  to  the  end 
of  the  seventeenth  century;  A.  Kornilov,  English  trans,  by  A. 
S.  Kaun,  Modern  Russian  History,  2  vols.  (1917);  Maxime 
Kovalevsky,  Modern  Customs  and  Ancient  Laws  of  Russia  (1891), 
Russian  Political  Institutions  (1902),  excellent  and  scholarly; 


EUROPEAN    STATES    IN    1870      121 

James  Mavor,  An  Economic  History  of  Russia,  2  vols.  (1914), 
best  economic  history;  W.  R.  A.  Morfill,  History  of  Russia  from 
the  Birth  of  Peter  the  Great  to  the  Death  of  Alexander  II  (1902); 
T.  Schiemaiin,  Geschichte  Russhuuls  unter  Kaiser  Xikolaus  I,  4 
vols.  (1904-19);  F.  H.  Skrine,  The  Expansion  of  Russia  (3ci  ed. 
1915). 

Italy :  Janet  P.  Trevelyan,  A  Short  History  of  the  Italian  People 
(1920) ;  P.  L.  Orsi,  ^Italia  Moderna:  Storia  degli  Ultimi  150  Auni 
(2d  ed.  1902) .  Also  M.  Brali, Geschichte  des  Kirchenstaats, .'3  vols. 
(1897-1900);  Bolton  King,  History  of  Italian  Unity,  2  vols. 
(1899),  best  account  of,  in  English;  Ernesto  Masi,  //  Risorgi- 
mento  Italiano,  2  vols.  (1918);  W.  J.  Stillman,  The  Union  of 
Italy,  1815-1895  (1898);  G.  M.  Trevelyan,  Garibaldi's  Defense 
of  the  Roman  Republic  (1907),  Garibaldi  and  the  Thousand  (1909), 
Garibaldi  and  the  Making  of  Italy  (1911),  brilliantly  WTitten; 
H.  R.  Whitehouse,  Collapse  of  The  Kingdom  of  Naples  (1899). 

Spain:  C.  E.  Chapman,  A  History  of  Spain  (1919),  based 
mostly  on  Don  Rafael  Altamira,  Ilistoria  de  Espana  y  de  la 
Civilizacion  Espahola,  4  vols.  (1900-11),  the  best  general  work. 
Also  Butler  Clarke,  Modern  Spain,  1815-1898  (1906);  G.  D.  du 
Dezert,  VEspagne  de  VAncien  Regime,  3  vols.  (1897-1904); 
Gustave  Hubbard,  Histoire  Contemporaine  de  VEspagne,  6  vols. 
(1869-83),  excellent  for  the  period  1814-18G8;  M.  A.  S.  Hume, 
Spain:  Its  Greatness  and  Decay  {U79-1788)  (1888);  E.  H. 
Strobel,  The  Spanish  Revolidion,  1868-1875  (1898). 

The  Ottoman  Empire:  Stanley  Lane-Poole,  The  Story  of 
Turkey  (1897);  Nicholae  Jorga,  Geschichte  des  Osmanischen 
Reiches,  5  vols.  (1908-13),  best. 

The  lesser  states:  P.  J.  Blok,  Geschiedenis  van  het  Neder- 
landsche  Volk,  4  vols.  (2d  ed.  1912-15),  trans,  by  Ruth  Putnam 
and  others.  History  of  the  People  of  the  Netherlands,  5  vols.  (1898- 
1912);  Leon  van  der  Essen,  A  Short  History  of  Belgium  (1916); 
Wilhelm  Oechsli,  Geschichte  der  Schweiz  im  Neunzehnten  Jahr- 
hundert.  Vols.  I,  II  (1903-13),  covering  the  period  1798-1830; 
R.  N.  Bain,  Scandinavia,  a  Political  History  of  Denmark,  Norway, 
and  Sweden,  from  1513  to  1900  (1905). 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE   MILITARY   TRIUMPHS    OF 
GERMANY,   1864-1871 

The  old  political  science  was  mistaken  when  it  regarded  the  Army 
as  nothing  but  the  servant  of  diplomacy.  .  .  .  Such  a  con- 
ception .  .  .  has  vanished  from  our  age  of  universal  military 
service;  for  we  all  feel  nowadays  .  .  .  that  the  very  consti- 
tution of  the  State  reposes  upon  the  nation's  share  in  bearing 
arms. 
Treitschke,  Politics  (trans.  1916),  ii.  389. 

The  military  becomes  the  normal  form  of  life.  Our  civil  life  is  to  be 
recast.  Every  citizen  is  to  be  a  soldier.  .  .  .  Moltke  and 
Bismarck  are  the  great  men  of  our  age.  Prussia  is  our  model 
state  of  an  armed  and  drilled  nation.  .  .  .  The  military  be- 
comes the  true  tj^pe  of  human  society;  some  pitiless  strategist  is 
a  hero;  some  unscrupulous  conspirator  is  a  statesman;  and  the  na- 
tion which  is  the  best  drilled  and  the  best  armed  in  Europe  is  to 
go  to  the  van  of  modern  civilization  .  .  .  this  we  owe  to 
Prussia. 
Frederic  Harrison  in  the  Fortnightly  Review,  December,  1870. 

Und  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  das  war  mein  Klang, 
Und  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  Soldatengesang, 
Dir  Trommeln  und  Pfeifen,  mein  Leben  lang, 
Hoch  Kaiser  und  Heer! 
LiLiENCRON  (who  Served  as  an  officer  in  1866  and  1870—1). 

The  great  SHORTLY  after  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century 

military  there  was  a  succession  of  wars  which  then  and  for  some 

triumphs  of       ^j^^  afterward  seemed  of  most  importance  because  of 
the  Germans  .  .  i    i      e  ^• 

their  part  in  the  unification  of  Germany  and  the  foundmg 

of  the  German  Empire.  But  seen  now,  in  the  longer  per- 
spective of  the  time  passed  since  then,  they  have  a  greater 
importance  because  they  completely  shifted  the  center 
of  power  in  European  affairs,  and  because  the  conditions 
which  decided  their  outcome  after  a  while  affected  the 

122 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


123 


life  of  every  great  people  in  the  world.  They  were  tlie 
Danish  War  (1864),  the  Austro-Prussian  War  (1800),  and 
the  Franco-German  War  (1870-1).  The  first  of  these 
struggles  is  relatively  unimportant  now,  but  the  second 
marked  a  new  era  in  the  history  of  modern  Europe,  and  the 
third  the  definite  ending  of  an  old  one.  In  these  two  great 
wars  Prussia  showed  herself  not  only  the  new  leader  of 
the  German  peoples,  but  invincible  in  battle  and  of 
matchless  military  might. 

The  successes  of  the  Prussians  against  Austria  and  of 
the  Germans  against  France  were  so  swift  and  so  over- 
whelming that  afterward  the  reputation  of  German 
military  power  was  held  almost  as  the  legend  of  some 
strange  and  superhuman  thing,  growing  in  estimation 
until  at  last  it  seemed  of  uncanny  and  overpowering  great- 
ness. But  actually,  after  this  military  power  had  reached 
the  height  of  its  grandeur  and  then  been  broken  to  pieces, 
it  was  seen  to  have  been  the  carefully  wrought  work 
of  men  who  introduced  a  new  principle  into  military  usage, 
and  then  perfected  their  work  with  wondrous  care  and 
organization.  In  the  end  it  was  evident  that  they  had 
brought  into  effect  one  of  the  most  important  changes  in 
the  nineteenth  century. 

In  the  history  of  military  organization  in  Europe  since 
the  breaking  up  of  the  Roman  Empire  there  are  seen  to 
have  been  several  great  steps.  In  the  Middle  Ages,  when 
the  "feudal  system"  flourished,  armies  were  composed  of 
tenants  who  held  land  partly  on  terms  of  service  in  war. 
As  the  feudal  system  decayed,  armies  came  to  be  com- 
posed much  more  largely  of  mercenaries  or  paid  soldiers, 
sometimes  hired  by  the  ruler  of  a  country,  often  as- 
sembled by  some  captain  who  made  war  a  business.  Such 
mercenaries  served  in  the  Hundred  Years'  War  between 
England  and  France;  they  did  most  of  the  fighting  in  the 
numerous  wars  between  Italian  states;  and  they  had  a 
great  part  in  ruining  Germany  in  the  Thirty  Years'  War. 


Military 
reputation  of 
the  Germans 


Armies  in 

earlier 

times 


124 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Hired 
soldiers 


The  national 
army  in  the 
French 
Revolution 


Developed 
by  Prussia 


As  strong  national  governments  arose  these  mercenary 
soldiers  were  gathered  together  under  direct  authority 
of  the  central  government.  In  the  seventeenth  century 
Louis  XIV  of  France  had  a  numerous  army  of  paid  soldiers ; 
the  German  princes  had  smaller  ones;  and  a  very  small 
force  was  maintained  in  England.  A  great  number  of 
Irishmen  served  in  French  armies  and  died  in  the  service 
of  France;  and  German  princes,  like  the  father  of  Frederick 
the  Great,  hired  or  kidnapped  their  soldiers  from  all  over 
Europe.  It  was  by  building  up  the  largest  and  best  army 
of  this  kind  in  central  Europe  that  Prussia  laid  the  founda- 
tions of  her  greatness.  In  this  system,  which  continued 
in  effect  until  the  period  of  the  French  Revolution,  the 
armies  were  small  in  numbers,  compared  with  the  total 
population  of  the  country;  the  soldiers  were  professional, 
making  war  their  business,  and  they  were  paid  for  their 
military  service. 

The  great  innovation  that  followed  was  suggested  by 
what  the  French  did.  During  the  dark  period  when  the 
work  of  the  Revolution  seemed  in  danger  of  being  over- 
thrown by  foreign  foes,  the  French  republic  was  saved 
by  great  new  armies  drawn  from  the  entire  nation,  called 
out  to  serve  their  country  in  its  need.  "All  France  and 
whatsoever  it  contains  of  men  and  resources  is  put  under 
requisition,"  said  the  decree.  In  so  far  as  this  was  carried 
out  it  substituted  the  idea  of  the  men  of  the  nation  in  arms 
for  the  older  idea  of  a  small  force  of  hired  soldiers. 

But  it  was  left  to  Prussia  really  to  effect  this  revolution 
in  carrying  on  wars.  It  was  with  a  standing  army  of  the 
old  type  that  Frederick  the  Great  had  won  his  triumphs, 
and  it  was  an  army  of  this  sort  which  Napoleon  had 
crushed  at  Jena.  By  the  terms  of  the  treaty  which 
followed  this  defeat  Napoleon,  desiring  permanently  to 
cripple  Prussia's  military  power,  limited  her  army  to 
42,000  men.  But  from  the  degradation  of  this  period 
almost  at  once  began  a  splendid  period  of  regeneration 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY  125 

and  reform  not  unlike  that  which  a  few  years  before  had      Prussia  pre- 
made  France  herself  so  great.     In  the  years  from  1807  to     P^^^  ^°^ 

ffip  \?^a.r  of 

1813,  while  Stein  and  Hardenberg  were  freeing  the  serfs  Liberation 
and  abolishing  class  distinctions,  the  army  was  reorganized 
by  Scharnhorst  and  Gneisenau,  who,  in  order  to  evade 
Napoleon's  restriction,  kept  under  arms  the  42,000  men 
only  so  long  as  necessary  to  give  them  the  proper  military 
training,  and  then  summoned  in  succession  other  forces 
of  equal  size  to  receive  a  like  training.  The  result  of  this 
was  that  when,  in  1813,  Prussia  rose  against  the  French 
Empire  in  the  War  of  Liberation,  she  was  able  to  put  into 
the  field  270,000  well-trained  soldiers.  And  the  new 
principle,  which  had  been  used  in  accomplishing  this,  was 
strengthened  and  preserved  as  soon  as  Napoleon  was 
overthrown.  In  1814  the  idea  of  the  great  reformers,  that 
military  service  was  the  obligation  of  the  citizen  and 
that  the  army  should  be  a  national  force,  was  embodied 
in  the  Military  Law  of  Boyen,  which,  proclaiming  that 
"Every  citizen  is  bound  to  defend  his  Fatherland,"  pro-  Boyen's 
vided  for  universal  military  service.  Every  man  in  Prus-  ^^^»  ^^^* 
sia  was  liable,  on  becoming  twenty  years  old.  He  was  to 
serve  for  three  years  in  the  standing  army  and  two  years 
in  the  reserve;  then  for  fourteen  years  afterward  he  might 
be  called  to  serve  in  the  Landwehr,  and  for  eleven  years 
thereafter  in  the  Landsturm.  That  is  to  say,  there  was 
now  organized  in  Prussia  an  army  of  the  men  of  the  na- 
tion, part  of  whom  were  in  active  service  and  ready  for 
sudden  emergency,  while  the  rest  might  be  mobilized 
or  called  out  from  the  various  reserves,  if  the  country 
should  need  them. 

For  a  long  time  the  importance  of  this  regulation  was     xhePrus- 
not  realized  outside  of  Prussia.     Even  there  it  was  not     sian  army 
fully  applied,  for  Prussia  did  not  really  have  universal     enlarged 
military  service.     Not  all  the  young  men  were  called  to 
the  colors  when  they  came  to  be  twenty  years  old,  and  as 
numbers  increased,  the   proportion   of   those   not   called 


1^26 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  work  of 
Bismarck 


The  work 
of  Von 
Moltke  and 
Von  Roon 


grew  steadily  larger.  In  1860,  when  the  population  of 
Prussia  was  18,000,000,  with  150,000  young  men  of 
military  age  each  year,  she  called  into  service  only  40,000 
as  had  been  arranged  in  1814  when  the  population  was 
about  11,000,000.  There  was  a  bitter  struggle  in  1862, 
between  the  king  and  the  Prussian  parliament,  over  a 
plan  brought  forward  by  the  king  and  his  military  advisers 
for  enlarging  the  army  by  calling  each  year  65,000  youths  to 
the  colors.  For  this  scheme  the  lower  house  of  the  Landtag 
refused  to  appropriate  the  necessary  money.  It  was  at 
this  juncture  that  Bismarck  was  brought  into  the  ministry. 
Under  his  guidance  affairs  were  managed  without  parlia- 
mentary sanction.  The  desired  military  reforms  were 
now  carried  through,  and  the  standing  army  was  in- 
creased to  400,000,  with  double  that  number  of  trained 
reserves  in  the  Landwehr. 

Along  with  this  development  of  a  new  army  went  the 
work  of  the  greatest  military  genius  in  all  the  period  be- 
tween Napoleon  and  Foch.  In  1857  Von  Moltke  was 
appointed  chief  of  staff  of  the  Prussian  army.  He  was 
the  second  greatest  master  of  military  organization  and 
preparation  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Since  the  period 
of  Napoleon  European  railway  systems  had  grown  up  and 
communications  had  been  much  altered  and  improved. 
Von  Moltke  realized  clearly  the  importance  and  the 
military  meaning  of  these  changes  and  began  training  the 
commanders  of  the  Prussian  armies  in  great  schemes  of 
maneuver,  mobilization,  and  attack,  worked  out  in  advance. 
Not  only  were  plans  elaborated  in  minutest  detail  for  the 
carrying  on  of  possible  wars  with  other  great  powers  near 
by,  but  under  Von  Roon  the  most  careful  arrangements 
for  rapid  mobilization  were  prepared,  so  that  when  the 
hour  for  action  came  each  man  might  quickly  know  just 
what  to  do.  Military  stores  and  equipment  were  got  to- 
gether, a  splendid  artillery  was  provided,  and  the  "needle- 
gun,"  a  breech-loading  rifle,  was  adopted  for  infantry  use. 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


127 


The  result  of  all  this  was  that  by  1864i  Prussia  had  the 
largest  and  best-equipped  army  in  the  world,  with  the 
largest  number  of  well-trained  reserves  behind  it,  and  that 
this  army  coukl  be  moved  down  to  the  frontier  with  a 
speed  hitherto  undreamed  of. 

Outside  of  Prussian  military  circles  much  of  this,  as  is 
often  the  ease  when  great  changes  are  developing,  was 
little  noticed  or  understood  at  the  time.  France  was  still 
considered  the  greatest  military  power  on  the  Continent, 
and  most  people  would  have  regarded  Austria  as  more 
important  than  Prussia.  That  which  opened  the  eyes  of 
contemporaries  and  led  directly  to  great  changes  which 
were  to  mark  off  the  earlier  from  the  latter  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century  in  Europe,  was  the  series  of  wars 
in  which  the  Prussian  army  was  used  and  in  which  Bis- 
marck consolidated  the  German  Empire. 

Moltke's  plans  for  military  campaigns  were  always 
conceived  with  respect  to  political  conditions  and  diplo- 
matic relations  in  Europe.  With  respect  to  these  things 
he  worked  with  Prussia's  great  statesman,  Bismarck. 
The  German  statesmen  who  began  the  Great  War  in 
1914  were  not  able  to  prevent  Germany  appearing  as  the 
aggressor  and  mostly  in  the  wrong;  but  Bismarck  always 
contrived,  sometimes  with  baseness  and  cunning  but 
always  with  most  masterly  skill,  to  put  the  odium  on  his 
opponents,  and  arrange  matters  so  that  they  fought 
without  the  sympathy  or  the  assistance  of  others. 

The  first  contest,  the  Danish  War,  needs  little  attention, 
for  it  is  principally  important  now  because  of  what  it  led 
up  to.  South  of  Denmark  were  the  two  duchies  of  Schles- 
wig  and  Holstein,  peopled  largely  by  Germans,  but  joined 
with  Denmark  by  a  personal  union,  since  the  Danish  king 
was  also  Duke  of  Schleswig  and  of  Holstein.  Holstein 
was  a  member  of  the  Germanic  Confederation.  The 
Schleswig-Holstein  question  had  long  been  troublesome 
in  the  politics  of  Europe.     Many  people  in  these  provinces 


These 

changes 
attract 
little  atten- 
tion 


Diplomacy 
and  military 
stategy 


Schleswig- 
Holstein 


128 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
Confedera- 
tion, Den- 
mark, and 
the  Duchies 


War  with 

Denmark, 

1864 


preferred  some  connection  with  their  kinsmen  in  the  Ger- 
man   Confederation,   but    the    Danish    kings    naturally 
desired  to  attach  the  provinces  more   closely    to  their 
kingdom.   In  1852  the  so-called  London  Protocol  provided 
that  while  the  king  of  Denmark  might  be  duke  of  Schleswig, 
the  duchy  should  not  be  made  part  of  Denmark.    In  1863, 
however,  the  Danish  Government  prepared  to  annex  both 
duchies.     The  Diet  of  the  Confederation  protested,  and 
the  Germans  were  eager  that  the  incorporation  should 
be  prevented.     Indeed,  they  desired  that  Schleswig  also 
should  be  admitted  into  their  Confederation.     Bismarck 
began  now  to  plan,  as  he  afterward  declared,  to  annex 
the  duchies  to  Prussia.     He  contrived,  however,  to  make 
it  appear  that  measures  were  only  being  taken  to  maintain 
the  provisions  of  the  Protocol  of  London,  or  else  merely 
to  admit  Schleswig  to  the  Confederation.     Accordingly, 
he  was  able  to  bring  it  about  that  Austria,  whose  measures 
he  had  just  been  opposing,  acted  with  Prussia.     In  Janu- 
ary 1864,  the  governments  sent  an  ultimatum  demand- 
ing that  within  forty-eight  hours  the  Danish  Government 
repeal  the  constitution  which  decreed  that  the  provinces 
be  annexed.     This  demand  was  purposely  so  contrived 
that  it  could  not  be  accepted,  and  war  was  begun.     The 
armies  brought  against  Denmark  were  more  than  sufficient 
to  overwhelm  her.     Von  Moltke  prepared  a  plan  of  cam- 
paign by  which  he  expected  in  very  short  time  to  destroy 
the  entire  Danish  army.     The  plan  was  not  well  carried 
out,  but  this  only  delayed  the  end.     The  Danes  attempted 
to  defend  themselves  behind  the  Dannevirke,  a  fortified  line 
of  defense  across  the  narrowest  part  of  Jutland;  but  their 
entrenchments  were  soon  forced,  and  the  entire  peninsula 
overrun.     The  Danes  at  first  had  command  of  the  sea,  but 
this  was  lost  and  the  invaders  carried  the  war  forward  into 
the  islands   which    are   such   an   important  part  of   the 
kingdom.     In   August   the   contest   was   abandoned;   in 
October  the  Treaty  of  Vienna  sealed  the  surrender  of 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


129 


Denmark;  and  Schleswig  and  Holstein  were  yielded  to  the 
joint  possession  of  Austria  and  Prussia. 

This  was  only  a  prelude  to  the  greater  struggle  which 
followed.  Bismarck  was  about  to  Ijring  to  a  crisis  the  long 
contest  between  Austria  and  his  country  for  leadership 
among  the  German  peoples.  He  now  plotted  more  openly 
to  get  the  duchies  for  Prussia,  and  rapidly  the  relations 
between  Austria  and  Prussia  were  strained  to  the  break- 
ing point.  Austria  was  ill  prepared  to  maintain  her 
contentions,  so  that  she  yielded  to  an  agreement  not 
satisfactory  to  her,  the  Convention  of  Gastein,  by  which 
Prussia  was  to  administer  Schleswig  and  she  would  ad- 
minister Holstein.  Bismarck  regarded  this  merely  as  a 
temporary  measure,  and  busied  himself  so  that  when  the 
conflict  began,  Austria  would  have  no  great  allies  but  be 
obliged  to  fight  single  handed.  He  knew  that  Russia  was 
friendly,  and  that  Great  Britain  was  not  disposed  to  in- 
terfere in  Continental  matters,  if  she  could  avoid  it.  It  was 
apparent  to  all,  however,  that  it  would  be  disadvantageous 
to  France  if  Austria  were  overthrown  by  Prussia;  but 
Bismarck,  through  secret  negotiations  which  have  never 
been  fully  revealed,  probably  by  appearing  to  promise 
Napoleon  territorial  gains  on  the  Rhine,  made  it  probable 
that  France  would  be  neutral.  With  Italy  he  concluded  an 
alliance  early  in  1866.  This  was  a  dangerous  period  in 
Bismarck's  career,  for  his  war  policy  was  not  popular 
in  Germany;  and  Austria  might  make  terms  with  Italy, 
or  else  France  intervene  to  support  Austria  or  seize  Ger- 
man territory  bordering  on  the  Rhine.  But  the  hazard 
passed  as  the  crisis  moved  swiftly  forward.  Austria, 
mobilizing  her  forces,  demanded  that  the  disposition  of 
Schleswig  and  Holstein  be  referred  to  the  Diet  of  the 
Confederation.  Bismarck  declared  this  a  breach  of  the 
Convention  just  made,  and  seized  Holstein.  Almost  all 
the  German  states  supported  Austria,  the  members  voting 
in  the  Diet  that  the  federal  forces  should  be  used  against 


Contest  be- 
tween Aus- 
tria and 
Prussia 


Masterly 
diplomacy  of 
Bismarck 


130 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Austro- 
Prussian 
War,  1866 


Austria 
defeated 


Prussia;  and  the  Austro-Prussian  War  began  in  June, 
1866. 

Prussia  at  once  brought  forth  the  mighty  weapon  she 
so  long  had  been  preparing.  Her  available  army  num- 
bered 660,000  men,  well  trained.  The  infantry  was  armed 
with  the  needle-gun,  which  could  be  fired  three  times  as 
rapidly  as  any  other  gun  then  in  use.  The  artillery  num- 
bered 1,000  cannon.  Opposed  to  this  the  Austrians  could 
bring  into  the  field  600,000  men.  Their  army  was  based 
not  on  universal  service  like  the  Prussian,  but  on  the  con- 
script system,  in  which  men  could  hire  substitutes  if  they 
wished.  Their  infantry  was  armed  with  muzzle-loading 
rifles,  inferior  to  the  Prussian,  though  with  longer  range. 
Their  artillery,  800  guns,  was  inferior  in  numbers,  but  it 
also  had  longer  range.  Actually,  in  the  contest  which 
followed,  the  Austrian  artillery  was  very  effectively 
handled,  but  the  campaign  was  decided  by  infantry  fight- 
ing. The  Prussians  had  to  use  part  of  their  forces  against 
the  smaller  German  states,  but  the  Austrians  were  com- 
pelled to  detach  part  of  their  army  to  act  against  the  Ital- 
ians in  the  south. 

The  great  contest  was  fought  between  Austria  and 
Prussia.  The  Austrians  might  well  have  taken  the  of- 
fensive and  attempted  an  invasion  of  the  enemy's  country, 
but  they  resolved  to  act  upon  the  defensive,  and  in  Bo- 
hemia they  awaited  the  attack.  What  followed  astonished 
the  world.  The  ideas  worked  out  by  Von  Moltke  called 
for  grand  decisive  movements  rapidly  executed,  and  with 
the  splendid  army  ready  at  hand  all  that  he  had  planned 
could  be  done.  With  great  skill  the  Prussian  armies  were 
moved  through  the  mountain  passes,  and,  despite  all  the 
efforts  which  the  enemy  could  make,  they  were  united  at 
Koniggratz.  In  the  battle  which  followed,  the  Austrians, 
after  stubborn  resistance,  were  totally  defeated.  Their 
retreat  degenerated  into  a  wild  flight.  In  a  few  days 
Vienna  was  at  the  mercy  of  the  foe.     In  less  than  six 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


131 


weeks  Prussia  had  overcome  all  the  smaller  states  and 
destroyed  Austria's  military  power  completely.  Not  since 
Napoleon's  time  had  such  rapidity  of  movement  and  such 
appalling  strength  been  shown.  In  reality,  Prussia  was  now 
the  first  military  power  in  the  world.  As  a  result  of  the 
Treaty  of  Prague  which  followed,  Austria  was  virtually 
excluded  from  German  affairs;  the  old  Confederation  was 
dissolved;  Prussia  became  the  head  of  a  new  confederation 
of  the  north  German  states;  she  annexed  Schleswig  and 
Holstein,  and  various  other  territories  from  those  states 
which  had  opposed  her,  while  Venetia  was  acquired  by 
Italy. 

The  immense  significance  of  these  changes  and  the 
greatness  of  the  power  which  had  brought  them  about 
were  not  perceived  by  most  people  at  first,  and  could 
not  be.  The  alteration  was  understood  best  in  France, 
and  soon  a  great  deal  of  discontent  and  uneasiness  arose 
there.  Accordingly,  out  of  the  war  of  1866  there  presently 
emerged  the  causes  of  a  third  great  struggle,  this  time 
between  Germany,  led  by  Prussia,  and  France. 

Such  a  war  ought  never  to  have  come  between  civilized 
peoples,  and  yet,  as  one  looks  back  to  study  the  causes,  it 
is  hard  to  see  how  it  could  have  been  avoided.  Among 
the  French  there  was  growing  uneasiness  that  their  place 
of  leadership  in  Europe  was  being  taken  by  a  new,  up- 
start state.  The  government  of  Napoleon  III  had  passed 
the  days  of  its  popularity,  and  the  Bonapartist  leaders 
believed  that  only  some  great  success  in  foreign  policy 
or  in  war  could  restore  it  in  the  estimation  of  the  people. 
Napoleon  and  French  statesmen  had  expected  Austria  to 
win  in  1866,  and  had  probably  not  intended  in  any  event 
to  allow  her  to  be  so  badly  defeated  that  the  political 
balance  in  Europe  would  be  altered;  but  the  struggle  had 
come  to  an  end  before  they  could  intervene  or  protest. 
They  were  bitterly  disappointed  that  France  was  not 
allowed  to  get  territorial  compensations,   when  Prussia 


Complete 
triumph  of 
Prussia 


Feeling 
in  France 


Prussia  and 
France 


132 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Disappoint- 
ment in 
France 


The  plotting 
of  Bismarck 


had  just  made  such  gains.  Not  only  did  France  get  noth- 
ing of  the  German  territory  by  the  Rhine,  which  she  seems 
to  have  expected,  but  when  Napoleon  strove  to  acquire 
Luxemburg,  Bismarck  opposed  it  and  assisted  in  bringing 
about  the  neutralization  of  that  country  in  1867.  Na- 
poleon and  his  associates  were  completely  disappointed. 
They  perceived  that  the  position  of  France  in  Europe  had 
diminished  through  the  mere  change  of  circumstances 
elsewhere,  and  the  French  people  felt  instinctively  that 
something  was  wrong.  Accordingly  arose  in  France  the 
idea  that  there  must  be  "Revenge  for  Sadowa"  (Konig- 
griitz).  It  is  probably  true  that  the  great  majority  of 
the  French  people  had  no  desire  for  war  with  Prussia  be- 
cause of  these  things,  but  the  demand  for  action  was  skil- 
fully cried  about  by  the  press,  which  was  controlled  and 
cleverly  manipulated  by  those  who  preferred  to  have  war. 
Actually  the  French  leaders  tried  to  form  an  alliance  with 
Austria  and  Italy,  and  some  arrangements  were  made  for 
cooperation  between  Austrian  and  French  armies  against 
Prussia,  to  take  place  in  1871. 

The  machinations  of  Bismarck  on  the  other  side  were 
more  culpable  and  far  more  cold-blooded.  Desiring  the 
union  of  the  south  German  states  with  those  already  in  the 
North  German  Confederation,  he  believed  that  a  success- 
ful war  against  some  foreign  enemy — particularly  France, 
the  traditional  enemy — would  serve  to  bring  them  all  to- 
gether in  a  burst  of  patriotic  ardor.  He  afterward  said 
also  that  he  did  not  believe  the  unification  of  Germany 
would  be  allowed  if  France  could  prevent  it,  and  that  it 
would  be  necessary  first  to  overthrow  her  in  battle.  He 
felt  certain,  moreover,  that  Prussia  would  be  victor,  and 
so  be  raised  higher  in  Europe  than  ever  before.  So  he 
desired  war  with  France,  and  tried  with  all  of  his  craft  and 
his  skill  to  bring  it  about.  These  feelings  did  not  yet 
affect  most  of  the  German  people  nor  the  king  of 
Prussia,  but  were  shared  by  Bismarck  chiefly  with  the 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


133 


army  leaders.  In  Germany  also,  however,  the  press  was 
so  controlled  and  manipulated  as  to  hasten  on  the  contest 
as  much  as  that  could  be  done. 

The  direct  cause,  as  in  so  many  other  cases,  was  not  an  The  throne 
important  matter.  The  throne  of  Spain,  becoming  va-  ^^'° 
cant,  was  offered  to  a  member  of  the  Hohenzollern  family. 
France  fearing  Prussian  influence  in  Sj^ain,  when  it  was 
elsewhere  growing  so  rapidly,  disi)alched  an  arrogant  note 
demanding  Prince  Leopold's  withdrawal.  Bismarck  be- 
lieved that  this  was  the  opportunity  which  he  had  been 
seeking  to  bring  about  war  with  France,  but  the  king  of 
Prussia  directed  that  his  relative's  name  be  withdrawn. 
Bismarck's  disappointment  at  this  was  such  that  he 
thought  of  resigning;  but  almost  immediately  the  leaders  of 
the  war  party  in  France  gave  him  the  opportunity  which 
he  sought.  The  French  Government  now  demanded  that 
imder  no  circumstances  should  Leopold  ever  be  a  candi- 
date in  the  future.  The  king  of  Prussia,  then  at  the  vil- 
lage of  Ems,  rejected  this  demand  firmly,  but  courteously 
enough,  and  then  telegraphed  to  Bismarck  an  account  of 
what  he  had  done,  authorizing  him  to  publish  the  news. 
Bismarck  deliberately,  as  he  afterward  boasted,  so  con-  The  Ems 
densed  the  king's  words  that  the  result  was  certain  to  seem  Dispatch 
insulting  to  the  French,  while  at  the  same  time  the  Prus- 
sian people  would  believe  that  their  sovereign  had  been 
insulted  by  the  insolent  demands  of  the  ambassador  of 
France.  Bismarck  was  dining  with  Von  INIoltke  and  with 
Von  Roon,  minister  of  war,  when  this  was  done;  and  they 
who  a  little  before  had  been  much  dejected  now  rejoiced 
when  they  saw  how  this  message  so  cunningly  condensed 
would  most  probably  bring  the  war  that  they  wanted; 
and  they  finished  their  meal  with  right  great  joy,  caring 
little,  as  a  commentator  has  said,  about  the  thousands 
of  young  men  shortly  to  die  and  the  misery  to  women  and 
children  sure  to  come.  The  French  people  easily  fell  into 
the  trap,  for  immediately  upon  j)ublication  of  what  seemed 


134 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Franco- 
German 
War,  1870-1 


France  not 
prepared 


to  tliera  such  an  affront,  war  was  declared.  And  so  well 
had  the  thing  been  contrived  that  the  war  was  very 
popular  in  Germany.  All  the  rest  of  the  North  German 
Confederation  immediately  gave  support  to  Prussia,  and 
the  south  German  states  followed  also.  It  was  war  be- 
tween France  and  a  Germany  united. 

In  later  years  the  Franco-German  War,  as  it  came  to 
be  called,  appeared  as  the  great  landmark  in  the  military 
annals  of  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Seldom  has 
any  nation  been  so  quickly  triumphant  as  Prussia,  and 
seldom  has  any  people  been  humbled  and  overthrown 
as  were  the  French.  In  after  days  nothing  convinced  men 
that  German  armies  were  unconquerable  so  much  as 
memory  of  the  victories  of  1870.  Not  until  the  Battle 
of  the  Marne,  forty-four  years^  later,  was  the  legend  of 
German  invincibility  disturbed;  and  not  till  the  very  end 
of  the  Great  War  could  it  be  completely  destroyed.  Ac- 
tually, however,  it  is  evident  that  the  German  military 
organization,  with  its  system  of  universal  training,  had 
been  developed  with  the  most  careful  preparation  for  the 
contest,  while  the  French  military  system  had  degenerated 
so  far  that  France  went  into  the  struggle  almost  entirely 
unprepared. 

In  1870,  among  the  undiscerning,  France  was  still 
regarded  as  the  foremost  military  power  in  Europe.  Al- 
though a  new  law  had  just  been  passed  to  some  extent 
adopting  the  Prussian  system,  yet  her  army,  like  the 
Austrian,  continued  to  be  based  on  the  old  principle  of 
conscription  and  hiring  of  soldiers,  which  produced  a 
standing  army,  sometimes  strong  and  eflficient,  but  without 
the  great  mass  of  reserves  behind  it  that  came  from  the 
Prussian  method.  The  total  force  was  less  than  600,000 
men,  little  more  than  half  of  whom  were  available.  The 
French  did  indeed  have  a  better  rifle  than  the  Germans; 
and  they  were  beginning  to  use  the  mitrailleuse,  an  early 
type  of  the  machine    or  rapid-fire  gun,  but  this  weapon 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


135 


was  not  yet  generally  efFective,  nor  was  it  destined  to  be 
a  factor  in  war  until  tlie  (jlernians  themselves  brought 
such  large  numbers  into  use  in  1914.  Furthermore,  the 
entire  French  military  organization  at  this  time  was 
suffering  from  decny  and  poor  administration.  Plans  of 
mobilization  had  not  been  effectively  worked  out,  and 
supplies  and  munitions  were  lacking.  Actually,  when  the 
war  began,  France  was  able  to  move  down  to  the  frontier 
270,000  men  with  925  cannon;  and  during  the  first  period 
of  the  war,  the  first  two  or  three  months,  not  many  more 
were  ever  put  into  the  field.  These  forces  were  advanced 
quickly,  in  hope  of  taking  the  offensive,  but  there  was 
considerable  confusion,  in  which  troops  were  moved  with- 
out supplies  and  officers  could  not  find  their  detachments. 
A  slight  offensive  into  Germany  was  indeed  begun,  but 
in  face  of  the  ominous  and  overwhelming  movements 
of  German  troops  it  was  at  once  abandoned;  and  the 
French  troops  prepared  to  try  to  repel  the  German  in- 
vaders. 

On  the  other  side  all  was  different.  The  French  leaders 
had  mistakenly  boasted  that  their  army  was  ready  "to 
the  last  button,"  but  the  Germans  were  completely  ready. 
Everything  apparently  had  been  thought  out  before- 
hand, and  every  emergency  foreseen.  The  entire  German 
plan  had  been  carefully  prepared,  and  all  details  of  the 
mobilization  worked  out  in  advance.  It  was  well  know^n 
that  any  forward  movement  by  the  French  must  take  place 
along  the  railroad  through  Alsace  and  the  railroad  through 
Lorraine.  With  extraordinary  accuracy  the  German  staff 
predicted  in  its  estimates  just  where  the  French  would  ar- 
rive by  a  certain  time.  Calculations  about  their  own  move- 
ments were  made  no  less  truly.  There  is  a  story,  which 
may  not  be  true,  but  which  accurately  reveals  the  state 
of  affairs,  that  when  ]\loltke  was  aroused  at  night  and 
news  of  the  declaration  of  war  brought  to  him,  he  merely 
directed  that  a  paper  in  a  certain  drawer  be  taken  out  and 


Her  military 
system  in 
decay 


The  Ger- 
mans' 

preparations 
complete 


136 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
forces  ready 


First  phase 
of  the  war, 
Julyl9-Sep- 
tember  1, 
1870 


the  instructions  contained  in  it  followed;  after  which  he 
turned  over  and  slept  again.  At  all  events,  while  the 
French  were  beginning  to  discover  how  little  ready  they 
were  for  the  war,  into  which  they  had  gone  so  rashly  and 
with  such  light  heart,  the  German  troops  were  brought 
down  to  the  frontier  with  such  speed  and  precision  as 
had  never  been  seen  before.  The  Germans  had,  all  told,  a 
million  well-trained  troops.  Of  this  number  they  moved 
forward  nearly  500,000  with  1,584  guns,  and  had  them 
across  into  France  in  a  little  more  than  two  weeks.  The 
way  had  been  prepared  by  an  army  of  spies,  who  did  all 
they  could  to  confuse  the  French  movements,  while  they 
collected  information  for  the  Germans. 

Outnumbered  two  to  one  in  men  and  in  cannon,  and 
fighting  against  an  enemy  as  brave  and  resourceful  as 
themselves,  the  French  were  overwhelmed  from  the  start, 
so  that  there  could  be  only  one  outcome  of  the  struggle. 
The  French  were  in  two  armies,  one  under  the  emperor 
in  Lorraine,  the  other  under  MacMahon  in  Alsace.  The 
advancing  Germans  fell  upon  them  both,  striving  to  keep 
them  from  uniting.  On  the  same  day  they  won  two 
victories :  at  Worth  in  Alsace,  and  at  Spicheren  in  Lorraine. 
The  French  fought  bravely,  though  they  were  not  led  with 
aggressiveness  or  skill;  but  they  were  smothered  by  the 
superior  artillery,  and  crushed  by  the  masses  of  German 
infantry.  Their  northern  army  now  retreated  toward  the 
fortress  of  Metz,  while  the  southern  one  abandoned  Alsace, 
the  Germans  following  with  little  delay.  August  18, 
the  northern  army,  now  commanded  by  Bazaine,  was  de- 
feated in  the  Battle  of  Gravelotte-Saint  Privat,  and  took 
refuge  within  the  fortifications  of  Metz.  A  smaller  army 
was  left  to  surround  it,  while  all  the  rest  of  the  German 
forces  hastened  after  the  other  French  command.  Had 
it  been  possible  to  take  into  account  strategic  considera- 
tions solely,  MacMahon's  army  should  have  retreated 
upon    Paris,   delaying  the   war   until   it   could  be   rein- 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY  137 

forced.  Political  conditions,  however,  made  this  alto-  Sedan 
gether  inadvisable,  since  such  retreat  would  almost  cer- 
tainly mean  the  downfall  of  Napoleon's  government. 
Therefore,  in  an  evil  hour,  MaclMahon  turned  in  a  forlorn 
attempt  to  relieve  IVIetz.  By  a  series  of  magnificent 
strategic  moves  INIoltke  presently  drove  him  into  the  town 
of  Sedan  on  the  Meuse.  There  he  was  pushed  back  until 
his  huddled  troops  were  commanded  by  the  German  artil- 
lery brought  up  on  to  the  surrounding  hills.  It  was  in  vain 
that  the  French  strove  to  break  through  the  ring  which  so 
swiftly  had  been  drawn  about  them,  September  1,  their 
entire  army  surrendered,  and  the  emperor  was  among  the 
captives. 

Actually  France  was  now  completely  defeated,  and,  France  now 
had  the  conditions  of  modern  warfare  been  more  clearly  defeated 
understood  then,  perhaps  the  French  people  might  have 
abandoned  the  struggle.  One  of  their  armies  had  just 
surrendered.  The  other  was  surrounded;  and  the  event 
was  to  prove  that  Bazaine's  army  could  not  escape,  for 
just  as  the  French  soldiers  were  utterly  unable  to  break 
through  the  encircling  Germans  at  Sedan,  so  they  were 
not  able  to  do  it  at  Metz.  The  German  armament  and 
equipment  were  so  powerful  that,  as  in  the  Great  War, 
it  was  found  almost  impossible  to  break  their  lines  when 
they  occupied  entrenched  positions.  Accordingly,  the 
regular  army  of  France  was  now  lost,  and  she  had  no 
reserves  of  soldiers  as  had  the  Germans,  because  she  had 
had  nothing  like  the  Prussian  system  of  universal  military 
training.  None  the  less  she  had  not  lost  her  courage. 
In  1918,  when  the  German  armies  were  tottering,  but  not 
yet  completely  beaten,  Germany  did  not  prolong  the 
struggle,  but  drew  back  her  soldiers  and  surrendered  her 
ships  without  any  further  attempt.  In  1870  it  was  not  so 
with  the  French.  We  see  now  that  their  cause  was  hope- 
less, but  they  made  a  gallant  effort.  The  government  of 
Napoleon  III  was  overturned,  and  a  republic  established. 


138 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Second 
phase:  Sep- 
tember 2, 
1870-March 
1,  1871 


The  siege 
of  Paris 


The  new  government  sought  peace;  but  it  refused  to  cede 
a  stone  of  the  fortresses  or  a  single  inch  of  the  soil  of 
France.  Bismarck  had  desired  the  friendship  of  Austria 
in  1866,  and  to  Austria  he  had  given  easy  terms.  Now  he 
was  resolved  to  have  conquests  in  France,  and  so  the 
struggle  continued.  The  German  armies  closed  in  upon 
Paris,  while  detachments  spread  their  conquest  wide  about 
over  the  country. 

The  effort  made  by  the  French  people  was  amazing. 
They  called  out  the  manhood  of  the  nation,  and  raised 
altogether  1,800,000  men.  But  they  had  armies  only  in 
name.  The  men  were  without  military  training,  and  were 
no  match  for  the  Germans.  It  was  impossible  to  get  enough 
capable  officers  and  commanders,  and  most  of  the  military 
stores  and  equipment  had  been  lost.  In  vain  did  they  try 
to  purchase  munitions  and  supplies  abroad;  they  got 
inferior  goods  at  outrageous  prices,  and  there  was  not 
sufficient  time  to  get  enough  of  anything  even  so.  Such 
was  their  energy  that  they  did  put  large  forces  in  the 
field,  but  during  the  terrible  winter  of  1870-1,  while 
France  suffered  fearfully,  and  while  the  French  soldiers 
endured  prodigious  losses,  the  new  armies  never  gained 
against  the  inferior  numbers  of  the  German  troops  a  single 
substantial  success.  It  was  not  even  necessary  for  the 
Germans  to  draw  to  any  extent  on  their  reserves  remaining 
over  the  Rhine.  They  held  the  fortresses,  Belfort,  Strass- 
burg,  INIetz,  and  the  fortified  camp  of  Paris  in  grip  of  iron; 
and  directed  their  principal  effort  to  the  taking  of  Paris.  For 
four  months  that  great  city  held  out  through  a  terrible  siege, 
and  finally  a  heavy  bombardment.  Provisions  presently 
gave  out  and  there  was  appalling  suffering  from  the  cold 
of  winter  and  increasing  famine.  The  old  people  and  the 
young  children  died,  as  is  ever  the  case.  One  by  one,  ex- 
cept for  Belfort,  the  other  fortresses  surrendered.  In 
Paris  a  great  citizen  army  was  raised,  but  it  was  ill-trained 
and  insubordinate,  and  never  able  to  break  the  lines  of  the 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


VM) 


besiegers.  Gradually  all  hope  of  deliverance  from  outside 
was  abandoned.  The  (iernians  everywhere  defeated  and 
scattered  the  raw  levies  raised  against  them,  and  oc- 
cupied more  and  more  of  the  country.  They  acted  with 
much  harshness  and  severity,  attempting  to  discourage 
the  formation  of  the  new  armies,  shooting  down  as  francs- 
iireurs  those  who  tried  to  defend  their  country  without 
uniform  or  part  in  regular  military  organization,  taking 
hostages,  imposing  fines  and  ransoms,  and  l)urning  some 
l)laces  in  reprisal;  not  so  hardly  and  so  terribly  as  when 
they  reentered  France  in  1914,  but  in  manner  that  was 
ominous  of  the  future. 

The  Germans  had  really  won  the  victory  in  the  first 
two  months.  The  heroic  efforts  of  the  French  people  pro- 
longed the  agony  for  four  months  longer.  Nothing  in 
those  four  months  altered  the  outcome,  and  they  merely 
imposed  additional  suffering  on  the  nation.  And  yet, 
this  heroism  was  not,  perhaps,  useless,  for  it  gave  stern 
warning  that  these  people  held  high  their  honor,  and 
would  not  yield  till  the  uttermost  had  been  endured.  The 
events  of  1918  showed  that  the  Germans  might  well  be 
expected  to  submit  after  they  had  been  badly  defeated; 
but  what  happened  in  France  in  the  cold,  horrible  first 
months  of  1871  made  it  evident  that  France  did  not  sur- 
render until  her  strength  was  annihilated  and  her  people 
completely  prostrate. 

January  28,  1871,  Paris  surrendered,  and  the  war  was 
presently  brought  to  an  end.  The  triumph  of  the  Ger- 
mans was  complete.  By  the  Treaty  of  Frankfort  (1871) 
France  ceded  Alsace  and  most  of  Lorraine,  agreed  to  pay 
an  indemnity  of  $1,000,000,000,  and  granted  favorable 
commercial  terms  to  her  enemy.  The  results  were  that 
France  lost  for  the  next  two  generations  the  primacy  in 
Europe  she  had  so  long  enjoyed;  that  her  eastern  frontier 
was  now  weaker,  and  Paris,  the  capital,  left  much  more 
exposed  to  the  Germans  than  before;  that   she  was  to 


The  lesson 
of  the  rising 
of  the 
French 
people 


The  Treaty 
of  Frank- 
fort 


,      ^_._.>     Luxemburg  (ftP 

'^  \        ^P>^^--£ThionvilU;V      ^ 

V^  V  v^y',  /(toiedenhof^njl^  ^ 


Kaiserslautern. 


frivat 


^Ia^s-la-TourO,C'■c/-/:^!S. 
Grayt)WtjSy/j>L 


R    R    A    Ifi^■N    E  ^v^, 


o 
Colombey/ 


^»'  •*         XHagefiauJy  11*9' 
Sa:Vbui  5  *^^^|Igg} 

,(-  S      ^\      HANTZ   \  I        fe/ 


"k/pr^)]  c\\,E  ,Vd.^.  ^|"^s4;//( 


21 


SEpinal 


bO'jhummeI, 


Langres) 


~r,'  -r    Wut  BiitachVVi         M|Veiburg 

'V  fSRAMOUT         '    '  '    ^^  >^^^ 

MTdODERES   :f  ,     ,  *.    / 

p,4^i     J  ^  Hartmannsweijtrkopi 

.  MWhUs 


■  Railroads 
Canals 


S9^ 


,<^>i 


3elfortj 


Mtkirc 


'LorrachN 


Scale  of  Miles 

0         10         20         30        40 
■ 

GENEP«I.  DRaFTIHGCO  IWC  N  Y. 


Bksels 


^^* 


/ 


":!^. 


swift  Z  ERE. 


D 


6.    ALSACE-LORRAINE 


140 


TRIUMPHS    OF    GERMANY 


141 


crouch  in  fear  before  an  all-powerful  and  arrogant  Ger- 
many for  the  next  forty  years;  that  German  manufactures, 
easily  exported  into  France  because  of  the  favorable  com- 
mercial terms  now  yielded,  were  to  make  it  very  difficult 
for  France  to  enter  upon  great  industrial  development; 
and  that  Germany  would  thereafter  feel  invincible  and 
superior  and  generally  so  behave.  Moreover,  the  entire 
cost  of  the  war,  at  the  utmost,  had  been  to  the  Germans 
not  so  much  as  $500,000,000.  But  they  received  double 
that  sum,  and  would  believe  in  the  future  that  all  their 
wars  would  bring  conquests  and  the  defeated  enemy 
would  always  pay  and  reward  them  with  booty. 

January  18,  1871,  just  before  the  surrender  of  Paris  and 
the  culmination  of  their  triumph,  William  I,  king  of 
Prussia,  was  proclaimed  German  emperor  in  the  Hall  of 
Mirrors  of  the  Palace  of  Versailles.  The  South  German 
states  were  now  willing  to  join  the  North  German  Con- 
federation, and  so,  form  an  empire,  the  Deutsches  Reich. 
Thus  was  accomplished  the  task  for  which  German  patriots 
and  statesmen  had  so  long  been  striving.  Fulfilment  was 
possible  now  because  of  the  unbounded  enthusiasm  of  the 
German  people  in  the  midst  of  their  common  triumph, 
and  because  of  the  ardent  spirit  of  nationalism  which 
their  efforts  and  victories  called  forth.  Expectation  of 
this  was  one  of  the  principal  reasons  why  Bismarck  had 
hoped  for  the  war. 


The  down- 
fall of 
France 


Founding  of 
the  German 
Empire 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


The  Austro-Prussian  ^ya^:  H.  M.  Hozier,  The  Seven  Weeks' 
War,  2  vols.  (1807). 

The  Franco-German  War,  origin:  Hans  Delbrtick  Der 
Ursprung  des  Krieges  von  1870  (1893);  Richard  Fester,  Brief e, 
Aktenstiicke  und  Regesten  zur  Geschichte  der  Hohenzollernschen 
Tronkandidatnr  in  Spanien,  2  vols.  (1913);  Due  de  Grammont, 
La  France  et  la  Priisse  avant  la  Guerre  (1872);  Edmond  Palat 
[Pierre  Lehautcourt],  Les  Origines  de  la  Guerre  de  1870  (1912). 


142  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

The  War:  Der  Deutsch-Franzosische  Krieg,  1870-71  (ed.  by 
the  Historical  Section  of  the  Great  General  Staff)  5  vols,  and 
2  vols,  of  maps  (1874-81) ;  Arthur  Chuquet,  La  Guerre  de  1870- 
1871  (1895);  L.  Hahn,  Der  Krieg  Deutschlands  gegen  Frankreich 
nnd  die  Griindung  des  Deutschen  Kaiserreichs  (1871),  documents 
and  official  utterances  for  the  period  1867-71;  C.  de  Mazade, 
La  Guerre  de  France,  1870-1871,  2  vols.  (1875),  contains  con- 
temporary documents:  Hellmuth  von  Moltke,  Geschichte  des 
Deutsch-Franzosischen  Krieges  von  1870-71  (1891),  trans,  by 
Clara  Bell  and  H.  W.  Fischer,  2  vols.  (1891);  E.  Palat,  Histoire 
de  la  Guerre  de  1870,  7  vols.  (1901-8),  to  the  surrender  of  Metz, 
Guerre  de  1870-1871,  2  vols.  (1910);  Krieg  und  Sieg,  1870-71, 
ed.  by  J.  A.  von  Pflugk-Harttung  (1895),  trans,  ed.  by  Major- 
General  Sir  F.  Maurice  (1914);  A.  Sorel,  Histoire  Diplomatique 
de  la  Guerre  Franco-Allemande,  2  vols.  (1875),  based  on  accounts 
of  participants. 

Special  studies  on  the  military  operations:  Fritz  Honig,  Der 
Volkskrieg  an  der  Loire  im  Herbst  1870,  8  vols.  (1893-7);  George 
Hooper,  The  Campaign  of  Sedan  (1914).  Also  E.  Palat,  Biblio- 
graphie  Generale  de  la  Guerre  de  1870-1871  (1896). 

The  Treaty  of  Frankfort :  Jules  Favre,  Le  Gouvernement  de  la 
Defense  Nationale,  1871-1872,  3  vols.  (1871-5);  G.  May,  Le 
Traite  de  Francfort  (1909),  best,  based  on  studies  in  the  ar- 
chives. 

Contemporary  accounts:  Dr.  Moritz  Busch,  Bismarck  in  the 
Franco-German  War,  1870-1871,  authorized  trans.,  2  vols  (1879) ; 
Eduard  Engel,  Kaiser  Friedrichs  Tagehuch  (1919);  Lord  Augus- 
tus Loftus,  Diplomatic  Reminiscences,  1862-1879,  2  vols.  (1894) ; 
Lord  Newton,  Lord  Lyons,  a  Record  of  British  Diplomacy,  2  vols. 
(1913),  the  British  ambassador  to  France  during  the  period  of 
the  Franco-German  War;  E.  B.  Washburn,  Recollections  of  a 
Minister  to  France,  1869-1877,  2  vols.  (1883),  the  American 
minister. 


CHAPTER  VII 

THE  GROWTH  OF  THE  NEW  GERMAN 
EMPIRE 

Die  deutsche  Nation  ist  trotz  ihrer  alten  Geschichti'  das  jungste  unter 
den  grossen  Volkern  Wcsteuropas. 

Heinuich  vox  Treitschke,  Deutsche   Geschichte  iin  Neuzehn- 
ten  Jahrhundert  (1879),  i.  1, 

Selten  oder  niemals  hat  ein  Land  in  so  kiirzer  Zeit  einen  so  gewal- 
tigen  wirtschaftlichen  Aufschwung  erlcht  wie  das  Deutsche  lleicli 
in  der  Epoche  vom  Frahkfurter  Frieden  bis  zuni  Ausl)ruch  des 
Weltkrieges.  .  .  .  Aus  deni  arnien  deutschen  Lande  ist  ein 
reiehes  Land  geworden.  .  .  .  Das  Volk  der  Denker,  Dichter  and 
Krieger  ist  zu  einem  Kaufnianns-  und  Handelsvolk  ersten  Ranges 
geworden,  Wo  sind  die  Zeiten,  wo  unser  Schiller  nur  zwei  gewal- 
tige  Nationen  ringen  sah  um  der  Welt  alleinigen  Besitz,  den 
Franken     .     .     .     und  den  Briten.     .     .     ? 

FtJRST  VON  BuLOW,  Deutsche  Politik  (ed.  1917),  pp.  291,  292. 

To  THE  people  of  the  new  German  Empire  the  period  Greatness  of 
following  their  great  military  triumphs  brought  unpar-  the  German 
alleled  prosperity  and  power.  The  years  from  1871  to  ™Pire 
1914  were  like  a  mighty  epic,  or  a  period  of  triumph, 
grander  and  more  splendid  in  time's  progress.  Such  in- 
crease had  probably  never  been  seen  anywhere  else  before. 
In  modern  times  it  was  rivalled  only  by  the  rise  of  Japan 
and  the  growth  of  the  United  States.  Sometimes  there 
comes  in  a  people's  life  vast  quickening  of  spirit  and  hope, 
when  it  seems  that  youth  will  never  depart,  and  boundless 
confidence  and  boundless  ambition  accompany  limitless 
strength.  Such  a  time  had  come  to  Italian  comnumities 
in  the  days  of  the  Renaissance;  Englishmen  had  it  under 
Elizabeth  and  Pitt;  Frenchmen,  in  the  French  Revolution. 
It  came  to  Germans  after  1870.  In  industry,  in  connnerce, 
in  population,  in  wealth,  and  in  power  they  went  forward 

143 


lU 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Causes  of 
success 


Government 
of  the 
Empire 


Ministerial 
government 


with  amazing  strides,  surpassing  the  greatest  things  that 
their  legends  related  of  old.  In  time  they  believed  that 
before  them  lay  the  destiny  of  men  who  would  one  day 
rule  all  the  world. 

This  success  came  from  many  causes:  from  the  union 
at  last  achieved,  from  the  splendid  qualities  of  the  people 
themselves,  from  the  excellence  of  their  educational  sys- 
tem, from  altered  conditions  respecting  industry  and 
trade  which  were  working  now  in  their  favor,  and  from 
the  German  genius  for  organization  which  was  applied 
to  winning  triumphs  in  peace  as  it  had  just  been  used  to 
achieve  victory  in  war. 

Bismarck  had  succeeded  where  a  long  line  of  leaders 
had  failed:  there  was  a  great,  united  Germany  now  with 
a  strong  central  government.  The  system  established 
was  a  very  interesting  one.  It  had  the  form  of  constitu- 
tional government  with  power  based  upon  representatives 
of  the  people;  but  in  reality  it  was  devised  to  retain  act- 
ual power  for  the  upper  class  supporting  an  autocratic 
ruler  at  the  top. 

Like  most  nineteenth-century  constitutions  in  Europe, 
the  constitution  of  the  Deutsches  Reich  was  modelled  after 
the  English  system.  The  British  cabinet  system — in  which 
an  executive,  composed  of  a  prime  minister  and  other 
ministers  of  the  cabinet,  depends  entirely  upon  the  sup- 
port of  the  majority  of  representatives  of  the  people  in  the 
legislative  body,  the  House  of  Commons — does  actually 
give  a  government  which  is  representative  of  the  people, 
controlled  by  them,  and  more  and  more  democratic  in 
character.  Generally  speaking,  wherever  the  cabinet  sys- 
tem prevails  in  any  form,  the  test  of  the  government  be- 
ing controlled  by  the  people  is  that  the  executive  shall 
depend  upon  support  of  the  majority  of  representatives 
elected  by  the  voters;  and  that  these  representatives 
shall  really  make  the  laws,  grant  the  taxes,  and  control 
the  spending  of  public  money. 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


14.5 


In  respect  of  these  things  it  is  interesting  to  study  the 
government  of  the  German  Empire  estabhshed  in  1871. 
This  government  had  been  taken  over,  substantially,  from 
the  preceding  North  German  Confederation,  estabhshed 
in  18G7.  The  German  Empire  was  a  federation  con- 
sisting of  twenty-five  states  and  the  lieichdand,  Alsace- 
Lorraine.  It  was  ruled  by  the  Kaiser  (emperor),  who  was 
the  King  of  Prussia,  the  Bundesrath  (council  of  the  Federa- 
tion), and  the  Reichstag  (representative  assembly  of  the 
Empire).  The  only  part  of  this  system  which  was  directly 
or  indirectly  controlled  by  the  people  was  the  Reichstag. 
For  the  most  part  the  constitution  was  so  arranged  as  to 
concentrate  a  great  deal  of  all  the  power  in  the  hands  of  the 
kaiser. 

The  Reichstag,  like  the  British  House  of  Commons  or 
the  American  House  of  Representatives,  was  elected  by 
the  voters — in  Germany  the  men  of  twenty -five  years  and 
older.  Its  functions  were  to  assist  in  making  the  laws 
and  to  pass  appropriations  of  money.  But  it  was  defective 
in  its  representation  and  it  had  not  very  much  real  power. 
From  1871  to  the  time  of  the  Great  War  there  was  no  re- 
apportionment of  representation  as  population  shifted 
from  one  district  to  another,  notably  from  country  to  the 
cities.  Hence,  in  course  of  time,  conservative,  agricultural 
East  Prussia,  one  of  the  strongholds  of  the  Junkers,  had 
more  than  three  times  as  much  representation  as  some 
of  the  liberal  industrial  centers,  and  there  were  as  scandal- 
ous inequalities  in  representation  as  had  prevailed  in 
England  before  the  time  of  electoral  reform.  But  more 
important  than  this  was  the  fact  that  appropriations  of 
money  were  often  made  by  the  Reichstag  for  periods 
of  years,  so  that  the  representatives  of  the  voters  lost  much 
of  the  power  which  comes  from  steady  control  of  the 
purse.  Moreover,  no  important  piece  of  legislation  could 
be  passed  without  the  Bundesrath's  consent. 

The  Bundesrath  was  not,  properly  speaking,  an  upper 


The  German 

system 


The  Reichs- 
tag 


Inequalities 
in  represen- 
tation 


146 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Bun- 
desrath 


The  govern- 
ment of 
Prussia 


house  of  the  legishitiire,  and  h<ad  httle  resemblance  to  the 
American  Senate  or  the  British  House  of  Lords.  It  was 
composed  at  first  of  58,  and  later  on  of  61,  members  sent 
by  the  various  states  of  the  Federation.  The  delegates 
represented  not  the  people  but  the  rulers  and  governments 
of  these  states;  they  were  bound  to  vote  in  accordance 
with  instructions  given  by  the  governments;  and  they 
acted  really  as  ambassadors  of  the  princes  who  sent  them. 
In  no  way  did  these  members  depend  upon  German  voters ; 
they  carried  out  the  policies  of  the  rulers  and  upper  classes 
of  the  German  states.  No  law  could  be  passed  without 
the  assent  of  the  Bundesrath,  and  as  laws  usually  originated 
there,  the  legislative  power  of  the  Empire  was  to  be  found 
in  the  Bundesrath,  not  in  the  Reichstag.  But  as  Prussia 
could  always  control  enough  votes  in  the  Bundesrath  to 
prevent  the  passage  of  a  measure  not  approved  by  her,  gov- 
ernment was  really  in  the  keeping  of  Prussia,  which  had, 
indeed,  three  fifths  of  the  population  and  two  thirds  of  the 
territory  of  the  Empire. 

The  smaller  states  in  the  west  and  the  south  were  less 
military  and  more  liberal;  Prussia  had  the  most  back- 
ward government  in  the  Empire.  The  legislative  power 
was  vested  in  the  Landtag  (assembly),  of  two  chambers 
or  houses.  The  upper  consisted  of  princes  and  others 
appointed  by  the  king  as  hereditary  members  or  for  life. 
The  lower  contained  members  elected  by  the  voters. 
The  upper  house  represented  entirely  the  upper  class  and 
the  king,  and,  because  of  a  curious  contrivance,  the 
lower  house  represented  them  almost  as  completely. 
This  was  brought  about  by  the  famous  three-class  sys- 
tem of  voting.  "The  primary  voters,"  said  the  Prussian 
Constitution  of  1850,  "shall  be  divided  into  three  classes 
in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  direct  taxes  they  pay, 
and  in  such  a  manner  that  each  class  shall  represent  a 
third  of  the  sum  total  of  the  taxes  paid  by  the  primary 
voters."     The  result  of  this  was  that  two  thirds  of  the 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


147 


representation  and  the  control  of  the  lower  house  were 
given  to  one  sixth  of  the  voters,  who  composed  the  upper 
and  wealthy  class.  In  Berlin  it  came  to  be  that  a  rich 
man's  vote  was  worth  the  votes  of  fifty  poor  ones.  More- 
over, the  king  of  Prussia  had  an  absolute  veto  upon  legisla- 
tion, and  in  practice  initiated  such  laws  as  were  passed. 
That  is  to  say,  the  government  of  Prussia,  which  in  effect 
largely  controlled  the  government  of  the  Empire,  was 
in  the  hands  of  the  king  of  Prussia  and  the  upper  class. 
This  class  was  made  up  of  the  industrial  magnates 
and  especially  of  the  nobles  and  great  landowners,  the 
Junkers. 

The  Junkers  were  among  the  most  aristocratic  and  con  - 
servative  people  in  Europe,  exceedingly  tenacious  of  their 
privileges  of  class  and  high  position.  In  Prussia  and  in 
other  parts  of  the  Empire  they  constituted  an  upper  class 
apart  from  the  people,  having  the  social  superiority  of  the 
aristocracy  in  England,  but  with  much  more  real  influence 
and  power.  If  they  could  retain  their  privileges,  they 
would  support  the  king  without  flinching.  Accordingly, 
in  last  resort  the  real  power  in  the  government  of  Prussia 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  and  the  real  government  of 
the  Empire  was  also  in  his  hands  as  emperor.  The  Prus- 
sian Constitution  implied  the  doctrine  of  Divine  Right, 
and  even  as  late  as  the  years  before  the  Great  War  the 
emperor  asserted  this.  "Looking  upon  myself  as  the 
instrument  of  the  Lord,"  he  said  at  Konigsberg,  in  1910: 
"without  regard  to  contemporary  opinions  and  intention, 
I  go  my  way."  He  possessed  the  executive  power,  he 
appointed  the  important  officials,  he  generally  could 
control  the  Bundesrath.  And  his  ministers  were  not 
responsible  to  the  Reichstag.  In  Great  Britain,  opposi- 
tion of  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Commons  would  destroy 
the  prime  minister's  power,  but  just  after  the  Zabern 
Affair  (1913),  adverse  debates  and  adverse  votes  affected 
the  chancellor's  position  not  at  all.     Indeed,  he  told  the 


Junkers 
and  Kaiser 


Divine 
Right  in 
Prussia 


148 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Sovereigns 
and  minis- 
ters 


William  I, 
1871-1888 


members  of  the  Reichstag  explicitly  then  that  he  was 
responsible  to  the  emperor,  not  to  them. 

In  France  and  in  England,  where  ministries  wield  the 
executive  power,  it  is  necessary  to  know  something  about 
the  character  and  aspirations  of  the  principal  ministers, 
while  the  king  of  England,  even  the  president  of  France, 
has  usually  been  of  far  less  importance  for  a  comprehension 
of  affairs.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Germany  and  in  Russia 
an  understanding  of  the  aims  and  the  character  of  the 
emperors  is  all  important;  as  is,  to  be  sure,  understanding 
the  character  and  intentions  of  the  president  in  studying 
the  history  of  the  United  States.  In  the  United  States 
the  president's  power  is  limited  very  definitely  by  a  liberal 
constitution,  and  in  Russia  the  tsar  was  surrounded 
and  even  controlled  by  a  vast  bureaucratic  system,  or 
system  of  important  officials  whose  cooperation  was 
nearly  indispensable;  but  in  the  German  Empire,  the 
great  officials  who  assisted  the  kaiser  were  strictly  sub- 
ordinate to  him. 

In  1871,  William  I,  already  for  ten  years  king  of  Prussia, 
became  first  emperor  of  the  new  state.  He  ruled  until 
1888.  He  was  a  tall  and  stately  man,  and  the  portraits 
that  were  painted  of  him  recalled  to  his  subjects  the 
strong  German  heroes  of  old.  He  was  an  elderly  man 
when  he  came  to  Prussia's  throne,  already  conservative 
with  age.  Always  he  had  been  slow,  steady,  and  strong, 
not  one  to  go  after  new  matters,  or  sympathize  with 
reform  or  ideas  of  other  people,  yet  just  and  honorable 
as  he  saw  things.  He  had  served  against  Napoleon  in 
the  War  of  Liberation,  and  all  through  his  life  he  was  fond 
of  his  army  and  delighted  in  military  things.  In  politics 
the  newer  ideas  never  appealed  to  him  at  all.  He  was 
filled  with  the  old  Prussian  conception  of  the  high  position 
of  kings,  and  believed  in  divine  right  of  monarchs  as  thor- 
oughly as  the  rulers  of  a  hundred  years  before.  "The 
kings  of  Prussia  receive  their  crowns  from  God,"  he  said, 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


149 


when  he  came  to  the  throne.  The  gigantic  success  of 
Germany  during  his  years  tlirew  glamor  alxjut  liis  i>erson 
and  added  to  the  prestige  of  the  crown.  His  character 
did  not  alter,  nor  in  later  years  did  he  tend  any  more  to 
follow  the  changing  principles  of  his  time.  He  was  a  good 
judge  of  councillors,  and  where  he  gave  his  confidence 
he  gave  loyal  and  faithful  support.  Actually  during  his 
reign  the  destinies  of  the  Empire  were  guided  by  his 
trusted  servant  Bismarck,  whose  ideas  about  government 
were  always  much  like  his  own. 

During  the  long,  splendid  reign  of  William  I,  then, 
there  could  be  little  tendency  toward  a  real  parliamentary 
system  of  government  or  greater  control  by  the  people.  It 
seemed  that  this  might  come  about  in  the  time  of  his  son, 
Frederick  III,  who  disliked  Bismarck,  and  was  disposed 
to  alter  the  Prussian  conception  of  kingship.  He  did, 
indeed,  favor  parliamentary  control,  which  he  may  have 
come  to  admire  partly  through  the  influence  of  his  wife, 
who  was  a  daughter  of  Queen  Victoria  of  England.  But 
he  had  long  been  suffering  from  cancer  in  the  throat,  and 
when  at  last,  in  1888,  he  came  to  the  throne,  he  reigned 
only  three  months,  and  his  ideas  left  no  permanent  trace. 

He  was  followed  by  the  third  and  last  of  the  sovereigns 
of  the  German  Empire,  William  II.  William  had  been  a 
great  admirer  of  Bismarck  and  that  leader's  system,  and 
he  cherished  the  olden  ideas.  "The  king's  will  is  the 
supreme  law,"  he  declared  on  one  occasion.  Strong  in 
mind,  vigorous  and  aggressive,  he  tried  to  take  part  in 
all  things.  It  is  difficult  to  estimate  his  ability,  and  his 
character  remains  an  enigma.  So  brilliant  was  his  success 
for  a  while  that  some  considered  him  a  genius,  while  there 
were  not  a  few  in  the  meantime  who  whispered  that  he 
was  headstrong,  irresponsible,  and  rash.  There  can  be  no 
doubt,  however,  that  with  respect  to  ideas  of  government, 
he  looked  back  to  the  past  more  than  he  regarded  the  pres- 
ent.    Like   his   grandfather   he   tolerated   the  Reichstag^ 


Frederick 
in, 1888 


William  II, 
1888-1918 


150 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  spirit  of 
the  past 


Origin  of  the 

German 

system 


Germany 
once  weak 
and  helpless 


but  considered  the  ministers  as  his  ministers,  and  was 
resolved  to  abate  his  prerogative  not  a  bit.  He  loved  to 
conceive  of  himself  as  medieval  lord  or  strong  knight, 
and  a  heroic  statue  represented  him  as  a  crusader  of  the 
Middle  Ages.  It  is  not  surprising,  then,  that  neither 
during  the  short  time  he  remained  under  the  influence  of 
Bismarck,  nor  afterward  during  the  much  longer  period 
when  he  himself  governed,  was  there  any  important  change 
in  the  German  Constitution,  or  any  change  in  the  spirit 
of  administering  it,  which  tended  to  bring  greater  partici- 
pation or  control  by  the  German  people. 

It  must  be  remembered  that  such  explanation  of  the 
German  Government  is  from  the  point  of  view  generally 
taken  in  English-speaking  countries,  where  a  different 
system,  of  real  control  by  representatives  of  the  people, 
has  long  prevailed,  is  much  revered,  and  is  assumed  to  be 
right.  It  must  be  remembered  that  the  German  system 
arose  in  the  midst  of  circumstances  very  different  from 
those  which  prevailed  in  England  and  the  United  States. 
The  English-speaking  peoples,  protected  by  the  sea, 
of  which  they  had  command,  were  generally  safe  from 
attacks  and  interference  by  their  foes.  In  this  favorable 
condition  slowly,  generation  after  generation,  they  devel- 
oped self-government  controlled  by  the  people,  gradually 
taking  away  from  the  king  the  power  which  once  he  had 
held.  It  was  very  different  in  Germany,  especially  in  Prus- 
sia. Prussia  had  no  natural  frontiers  to  protect  her ;  she  was 
not  made  safe  by  waters  which  her  foes  could  not  cross. 
For  ages  Germany  was  despised  by  her  enemies  because 
she  was  weak  and  divided.  In  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries  she  was  ravaged  by  destructive  wars, 
and  the  German  people  endured  almost  everything  that 
invading  armies  and  lawless  soldiery  could  inflict.  Small 
wonder  then  that  they  should  come  at  last  to  desire  above 
all  things  the  strength  which  comes  from  union,  and  prize 
much  more  the  security  which  a  strong  ruler  can  give 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


151 


than  a  system  of  parliainonlary  self-government.  It  had 
been  so  in  Erance  before  the  Hundred  Years  War  was  over, 
and  in  England  after  the  troubles  of  the  fifteenth  century. 
In  both  countries  strong  centralized  and  despotic  govern- 
ment arose  and  flourished  for  a  long  time,  and  Divine  Right 
was  cherished  by  many  of  the  people.  Evil  conditions 
had  continued  longer  in  Germany,  and  the  consequences 
had  persisted  longer.  Accordingly,  most  Germans  looked 
at  these  things  the  old  way.  There  were  many  who  de- 
sired the  greater  liberalization  of  their  government,  and 
hoped  that  soon  there  might  be  a  parliamentary  system 
more  like  that  of  England,  with  ministers  responsible  to 
the  will  of  tlie  people;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  there  were  a 
great  many  who  declared  that  the  German  system  was 
not  only  better  for  the  German  people  but  that  it  was 
really  superior  to  any  other.  They  said  that  the  personal 
liberty  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  peoples  was  only  license; 
that  parliamentary  control  could  never  make  Germany 
so  strong  or  well  fitted  for  the  greatness  before  her  as  the 
strong  executive  control  which  she  had;  that  while 
their  government  might  be  "autocratic,"  it  was  far  more 
efficient  than  the  "democratic"  systems  of  America  and 
Britain;  and  that  it  was  able  to  give  to  its  subjects  far 
greater  happiness  and  good.  Truly  they  did  not  rule 
themselves,  being  governed  from  the  top,  but  they  were 
governed  well  and  were  better  off,  so  they  said,  than  any 
other  people  in  the  world.  Many  things  were  forbidden 
(verboten),  but  this  was  only  restricting  the  behavior 
of  individuals  for  the  greater  good  of  them  all.  Because 
all  this  was  so  sincerely  maintained,  and  was  true  as  the 
Germans  looked  at  it,  the  Great  War  of  1914  came  to  be 
partly  a  struggle  between  democracy  and  the  older,  more 
autocratic  systems. 

It  should  be  said  that  in  one  respect  the  Germans  un- 
doubtedly had  more  success  than  Americans,  though  not 
more  than  the  British.     The  government  of  their  cities 


Weakness 
and  anarchy 
make  strong 
government 
desired 


Alleged  ex- 
cellence of 
the  German 
system 


Excellent 
municipal 
government 


152 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Economic 
advance 


Agriculture 


was  clean,  efficient,  and  well-administered,  as  British 
municipal  government  came  to  be.  It  is  well  known  that 
the  people  of  the  United  States  have  been  far  less  success- 
ful; and  that  especially  since  the  Civil  War  the  govern- 
ment of  their  cities  has  all  too  frequently  been  character- 
ized by  poor  management,  corruption,  graft,  and  wasting 
of  public  money. 

The  unification  of  Germany  brought  wonderful  pros- 
perity, and  this  strengthened  and  justified  the  government 
that  had  been  set  up.  Seldom  has  such  success  ever 
come  to  any  people.  It  is  customary  to  affirm  that  the 
story  may  be  better  told  by  statistics  than  anj^  other  way ; 
and  that  is  true,  except  that  statistics  are  not  apt  to  make 
much  impression.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  after  the  Zoll- 
verein  was  formed,  and  especially  after  the  North  German 
Confederation  and  the  Empire,  in  almost  every  form  of 
endeavor  the  German  people  went  forward  so  far  that  it 
seemed  at  last  only  a  matter  of  time  when  they  would 
be  first  in  whatever  they  attempted. 

In  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  Germany  was 
mainly  an  agricultural  country.  For  most  people,  living 
was  hard,  since  the  soil,  unlike  that  of  America  or  France, 
was  poor.  Accordingly,  in  spite  of  the  industry  of  the 
people,  the  wealth  of  the  country  was  low.  All  through 
the  following  period,  however,  the  most  careful  fertilizing 
and  the  best  methods  that  science  had  devised  were 
applied,  so  that  as  time  went  on  the  yields  were  increased. 
Moreover,  Germany  adopting  a  system  which  England  had 
abandoned  with  the  repeal  of  the  Corn  Laws,  imposed 
protective  duties  to  aid  the  agricultural  classes.  This 
was  done  not  only  because  of  the  political  influence  of  the 
Junkers,  the  great  landed  proprietors,  but  because  the 
government  desired  that  the  country  should  continue  to 
raise  as  much  of  its  food  as  could  be.  The  result  was  well 
seen  when  the  Great  War  came.  At  that  time  England 
produced  so  little  of  the  food  eaten  by  her  people  that  a 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


153 


blockade  would  have  starved  her  into  surrender  in  a  few 
months;  but  Germany,  blockaded  though  she  was,  held 
out  for  more  than  four  years. 

Far  more  important  was  industrial  growth.  In  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  German  people 
left  their  hamlets  and  towns,  and  went  to  factories  in  the 
cities.  These  urban  communities  increased  so  wondrously 
tliat  whereas  in  1871  half  of  the  population  had  been 
engaged  in  agriculture,  in  1914  rural  work  kept  less  than 
a  third.  Berlin  grew  as  fast  as  Chicago  in  the  New  World, 
and  cities  that  had  been  quiet  places  or  asleep  since  the 
Thirty  Years'  War  woke  up  and  expanded  and  became 
vast  emporiums  in  a  lifetime.  Up  and  down  the  valley 
of  the  Rhine,  in  Saxony,  and  central  Prussia  there  were 
huge  factories  and  forests  of  chimneys  as  in  central 
England,  or  in  Pittsburgh,  or  Detroit. 

The  Germans  were  fortunate  in  having  the  basis  of 
great  industrial  development  in  huge  stores  of  coal  and 
iron.  After  1871  coal  production  was  enormously  in- 
creased. In  1905,  when  Great  Britain,  the  principal 
coal-producing  country  after  the  United  States,  mined 
236,000,000  tons,  Germany  already  produced  173,000,000. 
Before  tlie  Franco-Prussian  War  the  German  states  had 
no  large  supply  of  iron  ore;  but  in  Lorraine  the  new  Em- 
pire acquired  a  part  of  the  Briey  Basin,  the  greatest  de- 
posit of  ore  in  Europe.  The  deposit  which  is  "low-grade " 
was  not  deemed  very  valuable  until  the  later  discovei-y  of 
a  new  process  of  extraction  of  iron  from  the  ore.  There- 
after the  German  Empire  drew  from  the  Lorraine  fields 
the  greater  part  of  its  supply,  some  4,870,000  metric  tons 
out  of  7,000,000,  in  1910.  It  was  afterward  said,  with 
some  reason,  perhaps,  that  had  the  Germans  realized  the 
value  of  this  possession,  they  would  have  taken  all  of  it 
when  they  imposed  their  terms  on  France  in  the  Treaty  of 
Frankfort.  At  all  events,  Germany  came  to  be  the  greatest 
producer,  excepting  only  the  United  States,  of  pig-iron  and 


Industrial 
growth 


Coal  and 
iron 


154 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Causes  of 
industrial 
success 


Application 
of  science  to 
industry 


steel;  and  although  it  was  not  understood  by  many  until 
later,  this  leadership  was  to  make  possible  her  enormous 
preponderance  in  the  next  great  war  fought  in  Europe. 
The  Germans  entered  upon  their  industrial  revolution 
later  than  England  or  France.  Thus  they  could  profit 
by  the  experience  of  those  who  had  gone  before.  It  was 
soon  found,  moreover,  that  the  genius  of  the  German  with 
his  aptitude  for  organization  and  study  of  details  was 
admirably  adapted  for  the  large-scale  production  of  the 
later  stages  of  the  Industrial  Revolution.  Starting  lower 
down  than  their  more  fortunate  rivals,  the  German  work- 
men were  accustomed  to  a  lower  standard  of  living  and 
so  worked  for  lower  wages;  while  habits  of  the  past  still 
made  them  willing  to  work  industriously  for  longer  hours. 
Furthermore,  the  rapidly  increasing  population,  which 
had  previously  been  emigrating  to  America  and  other 
places,  was  now  absorbed  in  the  enlarging  industry  and 
furnished  a  constant  and  abundant  supply  of  labor;  while 
the  excellent  system  of  education,  particularly  of  technical 
instruction,  made  these  workmen  able  to  sustain  any 
competition.  In  no  other  country  was  there  such  im- 
mense scientific  activity  and  progress,  and  especially  such 
successful  adaptation  of  science  to  practical  uses.  The 
Germans  made  few  brilliant  discoveries,  but  by  enormous 
industry  and  patient  research  they  immensely  extended 
scientific  knowledge  and  then  used  it  in  furthering  their 
industry  and  arts.  Soon  German  goods  were  being 
sold  all  over  the  world.  At  first,  just  as  with  Japanese 
goods  now,  German  manufactures  were  sold  from  their 
cheapness  rather  than  their  worth,  but  presently  they 
were  so  much  improved  that  their  reputation  was  every- 
where known.  The  result  of  this  was  that  Germany,  once 
low  in  the  industrial  scale,  rose  until  she  had  passed  by 
France  and  Great  Britain,  and  finally  had  exceeded  every 
one  of  her  rivals  save  only  the  United  States. 

The  rising  industry   was  protected  by   high   customs 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


155 


duties.  This  device  had  been  common  in  the  Middle 
Ages  and  later,  and  was  well  knowTi  in  the  United  States. 
England  somewhat  earlier  had  adopted  the  policy  of  free 
trade;  but  Bismarck  was  convinced  that  lack  of  regulation, 
laissez-faire,  was  wrong,  and  that  industry  and  conmierce 
should  be  regulated  and  fostered  by  the  State.  In  1879 
he  abandoned  free  trade  and  caused  the  adoption  of  a 
protective  tariff.  The  result  was  tremendous  stimula- 
tion of  all  the  industries  of  the  Empire. 

Along  with  this  industrial  expansion  went  enormous 
increase  in  commerce.  Some  Germans  in  the  IVIiddle  Ages 
had  been  great  mariners  and  merchants,  and  for  a  long 
time  the  masters  of  the  Hanseatic  League  were  renowned. 
But  with  the  discovery  of  America  and  the  change  of 
trade  routes  and  the  decline  of  German  power  all  of  this 
completely  disappeared.  In  the  early  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  German  ships  were  seldom  seen  in  foreign 
ports.  After  the  middle  of  the  century  came  a  change. 
In  the  year  when  the  Empire  was  founded  there  were  only 
a  million  tons  of  German  shipping,  but  this  had  doubled 
by  1900,  and  the  increase  was  more  rapid  thereafter.  A 
vast  fleet  of  ships  was  created,  some  of  them  among  the 
finest  in  the  world;  and  the  German  mercantile  marine 
everywhere  competed  for  passenger  business  and  carrying 
of  freight.  The  government  assisted  this  development  by 
subsidies  and  state  supervision.  After  1900  the  Hamburg- 
America  and  the  North  German  Lloyd  steamship  compa- 
nies had  few  rivals  anywhere  in  the  world.  Hamburg 
was  the  greatest  seaport  on  the  Continent.  From  a 
lowly  position  Germany  had  in  shipping  and  commerce 
passed  all  of  her  competitors  except  England. 

As  a  consequence  of  this  industrial  and  commercial 
development  immense  quantities  of  German  goods  were 
sold  all  over  the  world.  Gradually  the  Russian  market 
came  largely  under  German  control,  great  progress  was 
made  in  South  America,  and  there  was  no  part  of  the  world 


Protection 


Commercial 
development 


Trade 
expansion 


156 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Study  of 
markets  and 
customers 
abroad 


The  German 
Government 
and  trade 


National 
wealth 


where  German  merchants  and  traders  were  not  seen. 
Much  ingenuity  and  skill  were  shown  in  the  opening  of 
new  markets.  They  entered  the  competition  late,  when 
such  rivals  as  the  English  had  had  a  long  start,  had  long 
enjoyed  monopoly  of  some  of  the  markets,  and  had  made 
their  names  widely  known.  The  Germans  now  not  only 
tried  to  make  cheaper  goods,  and  sometimes  better  goods, 
but  they  took  great  pains  to  study  their  customers' 
desires  and  then  suit  their  wishes.  The  attitude  of  the 
English  and  others  was  that  they  had  good  wares  to  sell, 
the  customer  might  buy  or  not  as  he  chose,  but  if  he  did 
purchase  he  must  buy  what  the  manufacturer  pleased  to 
make.  The  Germans  never  insisted  upon  this.  To  every 
part  of  the  world  they  sent  commercial  representatives 
to  study  the  markets,  find  what  customers  wanted,  and 
offer  them  easy  terms.  As  the  most  enterprising  young 
men  of  Britain  went  out  to  govern  or  work  in  the  colonial 
pK)ssessions,  so  from  Germany  they  went  forth  to  reside 
in  other  countries,  learn  the  language  of  the  inhabitants, 
their  customs  and  wishes,  and  establish  business  con- 
nections with  them. 

Not  all  the  success  that  followed  came  merely  from 
the  care  of  German  merchants  and  their  representatives 
abroad.  Not  a  little  of  it  was  because  the  German  Govern- 
ment constantly  lent  its  powerful  assistance  to  forwarding 
and  increasing  German  trade.  Some  of  the  methods  by 
which  this  was  accomplished  afterward  seemed  insidious 
and  unfair,  and  not  unlike  those  by  which  "trusts"  were 
built  up  in  the  United  States.  At  a  later  time  these 
methods  brought  hostility  and  condemnation  such  as 
attacked  "big  business"  in  the  United  States. 

This  making  and  selling  of  goods  was  accompanied  by 
tremendous  growth  in  population  and  wealth.  Before 
the  Empire  the  Germans  were  a  poor  people.  The  wealthy 
states  were  Great  Britain  and  France,  with  the  United 
States  of  America  rising  up  like  a  giant  and  presently 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


1.57 


surpassing  them  both.  But  the  two  generations  after 
1871  saw  amazing  progress.  An  increasing  popuhition  of 
industrious  and  Iiighly  intelligent  people,  urged  forward 
by  aggressive  leaders,  and  suceecdiiig  in  business,  ac- 
cumulated huge  stores  of  wealth  and  rapidly  passed  older 
rivals.  Figures  representing  national  wealth  cannot 
possibly  be  very  exact,  and,  indeed,  they  are  mere  esti- 
mates which  have  to  be  constantly  changed  as  circum- 
stances alter;  but  ,just  before  the  (ireat  War  it  was 
believed  that  the  wealth  of  France  was  perhaps  more  than 
50  billion  dollars,  that  of  Great  Britain  between  80  and 
90,  that  of  the  German  Empire  between  80  and  90,  that  of 
the  United  States  about  200  billions.  By  that  time  it  was 
believed  that  Germany  had  passed  every  rival  except  the 
United  States,  though  slie  always  remained  at  immeasur- 
able distance  behind  that  wealthy  and  fortunate  country. 
Marvellous  achievement  and  increasing  wealth  were 
partly  the  cause  and  partly  the  result  of  increase  in  number 
of  people.  This  was,  indeed,  one  of  the  most  striking 
and  important  things  in  Europe  in  the  nineteenth  century. 
In  1816  there  were  within  the  limits  of  the  present  German 
Empire,  24,000,000  people.  By  1837  the  number  had 
risen  to  31,000,000;  the  German  Empire  began  in  1871 
with  41,000,000;  by  1890  there  were  49,000,000;  in  1900, 
56,000,000;  in  1910,  65,000,000;  and  in  1914  the  number 
was  believed  to  be  little  short  of  70,000,000.  By  that  time 
the  increase  was  nearly  a  million  a  year.  During  the 
nineteenth  century  the  population  of  Great  Britain  had 
risen  from  10,500,000  to  36,000,000;  that  of  France 
from  27,000,000  to  barely  40,000,000.  At  the  beginning 
of  that  century  France  had  been  the  most  populous  of  tlie 
highly  civilized  states  of  Europe,  but  just  before  the  war 
she  had  been  so  far  displaced  that  Germany  had  nearly 
twice  as  many  people.  The  results  were  both  good  and 
bad.  This  increase  made  Germany  more  powerful  and 
it  also  made  her  richer,  since  it  constantly  gave  her  a 


Immense 
economic 
progress 


Growth  of 
population 


Germany 

passes 

France 


158 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Belief  that 
more  terri- 
tory was 
needed 


Contest  with 
the  Church 


larger  number  of  workingmen  who  labored  and  produced 
goods  and  wealth.  The  country  seemed  well  able  to 
support  them.  Once  there  had  been  a  large  emigration  of 
Germans  to  other  places,  but  this  had  altogether  come  to 
an  end,  and  almost  all  her  people  now  found  employment 
within  their  owti  country.  None  the  less,  it  was  increas- 
ingly apparent  that  so  large  a  number,  as  was  the  case 
with  England,  could  not  be  fed  from  the  Fatherland's 
agricultural  resources,  and  that  they  could  be  maintained 
only  so  long  as  Germany  made  goods  which  she  was  able 
to  sell  abroad.  As  time  went  on  this  was  becoming  more 
difficult,  and  it  would  be  harder  and  harder  as  the  number 
of  people  increased.  England  had  in  her  empire  vast 
quantities  of  raw  materials,  and  in  her  colonies  a  great 
market  also.  With  Germany  this  was  not  the  case.  Hence, 
as  will  be  seen,  there  was  increasing  belief  that  she  must 
have  more  territory  to  accommodate  her  enlarging  popula- 
tion, that  she  required  colonies,  and  ought  to  have  her 
own  sources  of  supply  of  raw  materials.  And  in  the 
minds  of  some  there  gradually  developed  the  feeling  that 
it  was  very  wrong  for  Germany  not  to  have  what  they 
thought  she  ought  to  possess,  that  she  had  been  deprived 
of  chance  to  obtain  them  by  the  wickedness  of  rivals, 
and  that  it  was  most  proper  for  Germany  to  take  from 
them  whatever  she  wanted  whenever  she  could. 

The  first  of  the  great  domestic  problems  which  con- 
fronted the  new  Empire  was  a  struggle  with  the  Catholics 
under  its  jurisdiction.  The  Reformation  had  made 
Germany  Protestant,  but  the  Counter-Reformation  won 
many  of  the  people  back  to  the  older  faith,  and  a  little 
later  the  result  of  the  Thirty  Years  War  left  the  German 
people  partly  in  Protestant  and  partly  in  Catholic  states. 
After  1648  there  was  little  trouble  about  religion,  since 
with  respect  to  religion  the  different  states  went  their  own 
way,  unhampered  by  the  weak  government  of  the  Holy 
Roman  Empire  which  bound  them  together  so  loosely. 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


159 


But  the  Empire  foimded  in  1S71  bound  firmly  together 
Protestant  north  Germuny  and  the  (Jatholics  of  the  Rhine 
and  the  south,  and  brought  them  all  under  a  strong 
central  power.  It  is  said  that  Bismarck  wished  to  assert 
the  supremacy'  of  the  State's  power  over  the  Church,  and 
desired  an  occasion  to  do  this.  The  occasion  was  ready  at 
hand.  In  1870  the  Vatican  Council  affirmed  the  doctrine 
that  the  pope,  speaking  ex  cathedra,  or  in  his  capacity  of 
pontiff,  was  infallible,  not  able  to  err.  Tliis  doctrine,  so 
counter  to  many  of  the  tendencies  of  the  time,  was  not 
assented  to  by  the  German  bishops  at  the  Council,  and, 
indeed,  they  withdrew  from  the  Council.  But,  as  is  us- 
ually the  case  in  the  strongly  organized  Catholic  Churcli, 
the  dissenters  soon  adopted  that  which  their  Church  had 
received,  though  some  German  Catholics,  including  the 
celebrated  theologian.  Doctor  Dollinger,  refused  to  ac- 
cede. Declining  merely  the  new  doctrine,  they  held,  as 
they  said,  to  the  old  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  faith;  and 
so  they  were  known  as  Old  Catholics.  Dollinger  and  his 
associates  were  excommunicated;  they  were  attacked  by 
the  orthodox  Catholic  clergy,  deprived  of  positions,  and 
denied  participation  in  the  rites  of  the  Church.  They 
appealed  to  the  government  for  protection  and  at  this 
point  Bismarck  intervened.  It  seemed  to  him  and  to 
others  that  the  doctrine  of  Papal  Infallibility  implied 
superiority  of  the  Church  over  the  State,  and  he  desired 
to  assert  the  supremacy  of  the  State.  Accordingly,  a 
religious  conflict  began,  famous  then  and  since  as  the  Kul- 
iurkampf  (struggle  for  civilization).  Strong  measures 
were  taken:  religious  orders  were  forbidden  to  teach,  and 
Jesuits  were  expelled  from  Germany.  Then  in  the  Falk 
Laws,  passed  in  Prussia,  1873-5,  the  State  was  given 
control  over  the  education  and  appointment  of  clergy,  and 
some  control  over  the  dismissal  of  priests;  a  law  was 
passed  making  civil  marriage  compulsory;  and  all  religious 
orders  were  suppressed. 


The  new 
Empire  and 
the  Roman 
Catholics 


The  Kultur- 
kanrtpf 


160 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Bismarck 
retreats 


The  Center 

(Catholic) 

Party 


A  bitter  conflict  ensued.  Catholics  protested;  the 
pope  declared  the  laws  of  no  effect;  the  clergy  refused 
to  obey  them  and  were  supported  by  the  strict  Catholics 
in  their  congregations.  Those  who  disobeyed  were 
punished  by  fine  and  imprisonment,  and  the  most  re- 
calcitrant were  expelled  from  the  country.  Soon  many 
bishoprics  were  vacant;  everywhere  churches  were  closed 
and  religious  services  suspended;  and  presently  there 
was  the  trouble  and  disturbance  of  life  that  had  used 
to  follow  conflict  between  Church  and  State  in  the  Middle 
Ages.  In  medieval  times  the  Church  had  usually  been 
the  victor,  but  after  the  rise  of  national  feeling  in  states 
this  had  generally  not  been  the  case.  Now,  however, 
the  contest  was  bitter  and  prolonged.  "We  shall  not  go 
to  Canossa,"  said  Bismarck,  recalling  the  old-time  humilia- 
tion of  the  Emperor  Henry  IV  by  Pope  Gregory  VII.  But 
Bismarck  could  not  win  complete  triumph.  Under  per- 
secution the  Catholics  rallied  and  strengthened  their 
resistance.  Already  in  1871  a  Catholic  Party  had  been 
organized,  and,  as  the  Party  of  the  Center,  had  become 
an  important  factor  in  the  Reichstag.  Now  it  became 
the  largest  group  in  that  body.  By  1878  it  was  evident 
that  the  policy  of  sternness  was  accomplishing  little.  Bis- 
marck had  antagonized  one  of  the  most  conservative 
elements  in  the  Empire,  and  now  he  needed  the  assistance 
of  conservatives  against  what  seemed  to  him  the  rising 
tide  of  socialist  and  radical  agitation.  Accordingly,  most 
of  the  anti-clerical  laws  were  repealed,  though  civil  mar- 
riage and  state  regulation  of  schools  were  retained.  By 
1887  the  conflict  was  at  an  end,  the  Catholic  Party  aban- 
doned opposition  and  gave  Bismarck  the  support  which 
he  needed  for  a  policy  which  it  approved.  The  State 
had  asserted  its  supremacy,  but  found  it  wise  not  to  make 
much  use  of  its  power.  After  that  time  the  Center  Party, 
the  strongest  and  most  solid  in  the  Empire,  remained  on 
guard,  ever  watchful  of  its  own  peculiar  interests. 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


IGl 


The  conflift  lo  which  Bismarck  and  ricnnan  conserva- 
tives now  turned  was  with  socialism  wliicli  had  hileiy  heen 
making  rapid  progress.  SociaHsm  had  })een  widely 
taught  in  Germany  before  the  Empire  was  made,  and  the 
socialists  elected  two  members  to  the  first  Reichstag  which 
was  chosen.  Thereafter  it  grew  steadily  in  importance, 
attracting  more  and  more  attention  as  the  years  passed, 
because  of  teachings  which  most  people  regarded  as 
harmful  and  wild.  Socialists  and  their  leaders  were 
considered  not  only  dangerous  but  unpatriotic.  These 
were  the  first  glorious  years  of  the  new  Empire,  when  the 
hearts  of  Germans  were  aglow  with  patriotism  and  with 
pride  at  what  the  Fatherland  had  wrought.  Liebknecht 
and  Bebel  and  others  had  not  only  opposed  the  founding 
of  the  North  German  Confederation  but  also  of  the  Em- 
pire, the  war  with  France,  and  the  taking  of  Alsace- 
Lorraine.  They  cared  not  for  military  glory  and  greatness 
of  dominion  but  for  the  rise  and  betterment  of  men  and 
women.  They  had  no  admiration  for  Bismarck  or  Moltke 
and  not  much  for  the  emperor  and  his  court.  As  these 
radicals  got  to  be  better  knowTi  they  became  more  hated 
and  feared.  Especially  the  governing  and  conservative 
classes  dreaded  the  undoing  of  the  great  work  which  had 
just  been  accomplished.  The  emperor  looked  upon 
socialists  as  enemies  of  himself,  and  Bismarck  longed  for 
a  chance  to  repress  them  completely.  It  was  largely  for 
this  reason,  because  he  regarded  socialists  as  more  dan- 
gerous than  clericals,  that  he  brought  the  Kulturkampf 
to  an  end.  The  opportunity  for  action,  which  he  sought, 
came  in  1878,  when  in  swift  succession  two  attempts  to 
assassinate  William  were  made  by  socialist  adherents. 
Socialists  denounced  these  deeds  and  disclaimed  all  re- 
sponsibility for  them;  but  there  was  a  great  wave  of 
indignation  and  anger,  and  it  seemed  that  the  time  was 
at  hand  for  crushing  socialism  in  Germany  completely. 

New  elections  were  held,  and  a  Reichstag  was  returned 


Socialism  in 
the  German 
Empire 


Socialists 
feared  and 
disliked 


\ 


1G2 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Repression 
of  the  social- 
ists 


State  social- 
ism 


ready  to  proceed  to  extremities.  Bismarck  now  entered 
upon  another  campaign  of  persecution  and  repression 
like  that  against  the  Cathohcs,  from  which  he  was  just 
drawing  back.  In  1878  a  drastic  law  forbade  all  publica- 
tions, all  gatherings,  all  associations  having  "socialistic 
tendencies."  Martial  law  might  be  used,  so  that  the 
government  could  easily  get  rid  of  socialists  after  remov- 
ing from  them  the  protection  of  the  civil  courts.  This 
legislation  was  temporary,  but  it  was  reenacted  and  re- 
mained in  force  until  1890.  During  that  time  it  was 
sternly  applied,  a  great  number  of  socialist  publications 
were  stopped,  and  a  great  many  socialists  imprisoned  or 
expelled  from  the  country.  But  again  this  whole  policy 
of  repression  was  a  failure.  Under  persecution,  leaders 
and  their  disciples  became  bolder  and  more  active;  and 
their  doctrines,  brought  to  the  attention  of  more  people 
because  of  the  very  measures  taken  against  them,  won 
many  new  converts.  The  Socialist  Party  in  this  time 
of  degradation  became  greater  than  ever  before;  by  1890 
it  had  gro\\Ti  to  be  thrice  as  large  as  in  the  year  when  the 
persecution  began.  It  was  now  so  clear  that  the  policy 
of  persecution  was  a  failure  that  the  repressive  measures 
were  dropped.  In  this  again  Bismarck  had  partly  failed. 
But  he  was  largely  successful  when  he  employed  another 
method  against  them.  He  himself  became  one  of  the 
foremost  leaders  in  social  reform  in  Europe,  and  undertook 
to  have  the  State  do  all  of  what  he  thought  best  in  that 
which  the  socialists  were  striving  to  bring  about.  In  effect 
he  went  further  than  any  modern  statesman  had  gone  in 
reviving  state  regulation  of  economic  and  industrial  con- 
ditions, so  customary  in  Europe  some  centuries  before. 
Thus  he  established  "state  socialism"  and  so  left  the 
socialists  with  less  to  fight  for.  He  and  the  emperor 
strongly  believed  that  the  best  interests  of  the  State  lay 
in  advancing  the  welfare  of  the  working  class,  and  that 
the  State  should  interest  itself  more  than  previously  in 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


1G3 


assisting  such  of  its  citizens  as  needed  help.  "Give  the 
workingman  the  right  to  employment,"  said  Bismarck, 
"assure  him  care  when  he  is  sick,  and  maintenance  when 
he  is  old."  If  the  workers  understood  that  the  govern- 
ment was  interested  in  their  welfare  they  would  cease  to 
go  after  socialist  leaders.  The  measures  which  Bismarck 
proposed  encountered  almost  as  much  opposition  as,  thirty 
years  later,  the  social  reforms  of  Lloyd  George  in  Eng- 
land. 

Conservatives  were  alarmed  at  such  innovations,  and 
socialists  denounced  them  as  not  touching  the  root  of  the 
evils  which  they  promised  to  cure.  Graduall3%  however, 
the  programme  was  carried  through.  In  1883  a  Sickness 
Insurance  Law  was  passed,  the  employer  to  pay  a  part 
and  the  employee  a  larger  part  of  the  premiums  necessary 
to  establish  the  fund.  In  1884  and  1885  Accident  In- 
surance Laws  were  passed,  the  employer  to  insure  all  his 
employees  entirely  at  his  o%mi  expense.  In  1889  came  an 
Old  Age  Insurance  Law,  the  premiums  to  be  paid  by  the 
employers,  the  employees,  and  the  State. 

This  legislation  was  revolutionary  in  the  nineteenth 
century.  It  was  afterward  widely  studied,  and  was 
being  more  and  more  followed  before  the  Great  War 
temporarily  put  an  end  to  social  amendment.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  in  Germany  it  had  great  success.  Not 
that  the  Socialist  Party  disappeared  in  consequence.  After 
1890  that  party  constantly  increased  the  number  of  its 
adherents,  and  after  1898  was  much  the  largest  party  in 
the  Empire.  By  that  time  it  had  dra\\Ti  to  itself  most  of 
the  artisans  and  toilers  in  the  cities,  and  had  it  not  been 
for  the  old  and  unequal  apportionment  of  representatives, 
the  socialists  would  have  had  a  still  greater  number  of 
members  in  the  Reichstag.  Nevertheless,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  by  1914  a  great  many  Germans  regarded  them- 
selves as  better  taken  care  of  by  their  government  than 
any  other  people  in  the  world;  and  it  is  probably  true 


Bismarck 
on  State 
supervision 
and  assist- 
Eince 


Government 
and  people 
in  the  Ger- 
man Empire 


16-1 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Care  of  the 
people  by 
the  gov- 
ernment 


Slow  prog- 
ress of 
democracy 
in  the  Em- 
pire 


that  nowhere  else  had  the  State  been  so  successful  in 
getting  rid  of  the  \A'orst  forms  of  misery  and  distress 
There  were  many  poor  people  in  Germany,  toiling  for 
scanty  wages  and  working  for  very  long  hours,  but  no- 
where in  the  Empire  such  fearful  poverty  and  physical 
deterioration  as  visitors  could  see  in  the  slums  of  the 
English  cities,  or  in  the  worst  quarters  of  cities  in  the 
United  States.  The  German  Government  was  guar- 
anteeing a  certain  minimum  to  its  people,  to  make  them 
content,  and  providing  that  the  State  might  not  be  weak- 
ened by  losing  their  services.  All  this  contributed,  more- 
over, to  the  centralization  of  the  powers  of  the  government 
and  the  greater  supremacy  of  the  State. 

As  time  went  on  it  was  not  only  the  socialists  who  de- 
manded change.  With  a  great  many  people  there  was 
increasing  desire  that  the  government  should  be  altered 
so  as  to  make  it  more  democratic  and  bring  it  more  largely 
into  the  hands  of  representatives  of  the  people.  Usually, 
in  other  states,  the  progress  of  industrialism,  which  caused 
large  numbers  of  people  to  come  together  in  manufactur- 
ing centers,  and  the  spread  of  education,  which  made  the 
masses  of  the  people  more  capable  of  self-government 
at  the  same  time  that  they  were  more  interested  in  govern- 
ing themselves,  had  brought  about  larger  participatior 
by  the  people  in  their  government  and  constantly  in 
creasing  desire  to  have  larger  share.  So  it  had  been  for 
a  long  time  in  England  and  in  France,  in  the  Scandinavian 
countries,  in  Belgium  and  Holland,  and  there  had  long 
been  persistent  efforts  made  by  a  few  people  in  Russia. 
But  in  Germany,  where  one  of  the  widest  and  most  effec- 
tive systems  of  education  had  prevailed  throughout  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  where  for  fifty  years  there  had 
been  unceasing  drift  of  people  from  the  farms  to  the  cities, 
the  rise  of  democracy  had  been  slow,  and  democracy  al- 
ways seemed  to  make  very  scant  headway  before  the  dis- 
asters of  the  years  of  the  Great  War. 


C-A. 


>  Essen 


-:7         \i 


■^^  /     )  dlpologne 

<■ .      - — v»Aachen  V^ 


A 


(  ■ 


vMainz.  ,V-'rv,/ 


S      iuxEWi Trier  ...       ;     \        < 

J    ^     ^,  1'     To  Bavaria  \       '3"^'  ^    --''? 


!V-~r*??',M(iO)  'l,J 

(uS?VVi,'/''  [o  Leipzig 

(70)  '?!:-/^'*:^-VC^X^M^>      Dresc 


s 


^ 


FRANCE 


'\J 


<^  ..wCrttemeurgJ 


a2 


•^ 


Munich  o 


^.^^ 


G£NE(t»l  DRAFTING  CO  iNC   N  Y  _/ 


/  SWITZERLAND  t-.  /         X-^A*  *•' 


7.    THE  GERM. 


HUNGARY 


Scale  of  Miles 
20      40      60      80 


16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 

23 
24 
25 

26 


Kingdoms 

Prussia 
Bavaria 
Saxony 
WUrttemberg 

Grand  Duchies 

Baden 

Hesse 

Mecklenburg-Schwerin 

M  eck  len  burg-Strelitz 

Oldenburg 

Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach 

Duchies 

Anhak 

Brunswick 

Saxe-Altenburg 

Saxe-Coburg-Gotha 

Saxe-Meiningen 

Principalities 

Lippe 

Keuss-Greiz 

Reuss-Gera-Schleiz 

Schaumburg-Lippe 

Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt 

Schwarzburg-Sondershausen 

Waldeck 

Free  Cities 

Hamburg 

Bremen 

L'ubeck 

Reichsland 

Alsace-Lorraine 


EMPIRE  IN  1914 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


165 


This  was  partly  because  of  the  old  associations  and  tradi- 
tions of  the  German  people.  In  England  self-government 
and  democracy  grew  up  slowly  and  i)ainfully  during  a 
long  course  of  time.  They  were  inherited  })y  the  English 
colonists  of  America  and  there  developed  under  more 
favorable  conditions.  In  France  they  were  violently 
established  at  the  time  of  the  French  Rev^olution,  and  then 
after  repeated  failures  subsequent  to  that  time  they  were 
gradually  established  among  the  French  people.  Ger- 
mans, too,  had  sought  these  things  and  tried  to  bring  them 
about;  but  for  a  great  while  they  were  confronted  with  the 
more  pressing  problem  of  unification,  which  England  and 
France  had  long  ago  achieved,  before  they  began  to 
develop  self-government  and  democratic  institutions. 
When  finally  German  unity  was  effected,  it  was  brought 
about  under  the  leadership  of  Prussia,  whose  rulers  and 
people  had  always  been  far  less  influenced  by  democratic 
tendencies  than  the  people  of  Bavaria  or  Baden.  The 
ideas  of  Bismarck  and  the  conservatives  predominated 
in  making  the  constitution  of  the  German  Empire,  and 
their  ideas  continued  potent  in  its  governance.  To  some 
it  seemed  a  pity  that  the  unification  of  Germany  could 
not  have  been  accomplished  by  the  liberal  and  peaceful 
Germans  instead  of  through  conquest  and  force.  In 
1870  Emile  Ollivier,  French  premier,  who  strove  so  hard 
to  avert  war  with  Prussia,  urged  his  coimtrymen  not  to 
oppose  "the  natural  movement  of  Germany  unity." 
"If,"  he  said,  "we  allow  it  to  complete  itself  quietly  by 
successive  stages,  it  will  not  give  supremacy  to  the  bar- 
barous and  sophistical  Germany,  it  will  assure  it  to  the 
Germany  of  intellect  and  culture.  War,  on  the  other 
hand,  would  establish,  during  a  time  impossible  to  cal- 
culate, the  domination  of  the  Germany  of  the  Junkers 
and  the  pedants."  So  it  was.  The  greatness  of  Ger- 
many's success  strengthened  the  conservatives  who  had 
brought  it  about,  and  disarmed  their  opponents.     And 


Causes 


The  Empire 
established 
by  the  con- 
servatives 
and  the  mili- 
tarists 


166 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  estab- 
lished sys- 
tem deemed 
necessary 
and  good 


The  govern- 
ment resists 
reform 


as  it  had  seemed  necessary  to  many  that  the  miity  and 
prosperity  of  Germany  should  be  achieved  through  force, 
so  afterward  it  seemed  to  them  that  Germany,  sur- 
rounded as  she  was  by  older  powers  and,  perhaps,  by 
enemies,  could  only  keep  her  position  by  being  strong 
and  ever  on  guard.  All  through  Bismarck's  period,  there- 
fore, the  central  government,  which  gave  Germany  success 
and  prosperity,  but  allowed  itself  to  be  affected  little  by 
the  mass  of  the  people,  retained  its  power  and  its  hold 
on  the  affection  of  most  of  the  people.  As  conditions 
altered  and  a  larger  number  desired  some  change,  it  was 
always  possible  for  the  ruling  class  to  divert  their  attention 
or  thwart  their  wishes.  So  long  as  the  immense  prosperity 
and  expansion  of  the  German  Empire  continued,  there 
were  not  a  great  many  who  would  oppose  the  rulers;  and 
generally  the  prosperity  continued. 

Moreover,  many  believed  that  even  though  Bismarck's 
work  was  thoroughly  established,  old  dangers  lasted  on 
for  other  reasons.  Germany  of  the  twentieth  century 
had  mighty  ambitions,  which  were  constantly  taught  to 
her  people.  These  ambitions  alarmed  other  European 
powers,  and  in  the  years  1904-7  a  combination  of  France, 
Russia,  and  England  was  effected.  To  the  inhabitants  of 
these  countries  this  agreement  seemed  necessary  because 
of  probable  danger  from  the  German  Empire;  but  German 
leaders  easily  persuaded  the  people  that  neighboring 
powers  had  combined  to  encircle  and  crush  the  Father- 
land, which  could  be  saved  only  if  the  army  remained 
powerful  and  the  government  strong.  These  arguments 
were  ridiculed  by  socialists,  and  they  became  less  effective 
in  time.  It  was  partly  because  of  the  increasing  demand 
for  more  democratic  control  that  the  Social-Democratic 
Party  increased  so  greatly.  In  1912  it  received  more  than 
4,000,000  votes,  getting  its  support  not  only  from  social- 
ists but  from  liberals  who  did  not  greatly  favor  socialist 
doctrines.     Nevertheless,    nothing    was    really    accom- 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


1G7 


plished.  State  socialism,  which  made  Germany  a  leader 
in  social  reform,  strengthened  the  central  government  as 
it  was,  much  more  than  it  assisted  the  tendency  toward 
democratic  reform.  "This  must  be  done  by  the  State 
and  not  by  the  people,"  said  William  II  in  1894.  For  all 
these  reasons  the  movement  to  make  ministers  responsible 
to  the  Reichstag,  though  urgently  sought  for  on  several 
occasions,  always  came  to  nothing.  The  demand  that 
representation  be  re-apportioned  in  accordance  with 
changes  of  population  went  unheeded  year  after  year. 
The  antiquated  Prussian  Constitution  continued  to  keep 
power  and  privilege  for  the  few.  In  the  midst  of  the 
Great  War — when  the  government,  failing  in  its  design  of 
getting  a  grand  victory  quickly,  was  compelled  to  seek 
the  utmost  assistance  from  its  people  in  a  long  and  ex- 
hausting contest — the  beginning  of  reform  was  made  at 
last,  and  promise  was  given  that  after  the  war  something 
more  would  be  done.  But  all  this  came  too  late;  for 
presently  Germany  went  down  in  defeat,  and  the  old  sys- 
tem was  then  swept  away  completely.  Whether  the  old 
system  was  better  suited  to  the  Germans,  whether  they 
really  desire  to  establish  a  democracy,  can  only  be  kno^Ti 
in  the  future. 

It  was  the  same  with  militarism  and  the  army.  By 
war,  it  seemed,  Prussia  had  risen,  and  the  army  had  been 
the  foundation  of  the  Empire.  Furthermore,  Prussian 
universal  military  service  had  created  a  national  army 
in  which  most  of  the  young  men  had  some  part.  For  these 
reasons  the  army  was  cherished  and  generally  held  high 
In  esteem.  And  it  was  so  entrenched  in  the  organization 
of  the  State  that  it  seemed  to  have  impregnable  position. 
Its  officers  and  leaders,  drawn  mostly  from  the  aristocratic 
class,  constituted  a  military  caste,  and  on  occasion  as- 
sumed such  privileges  that  they  seemed  to  be  above  the 
law.  From  time  to  time  officers  treated  civilians  with 
violence  or  with  the  utmost  contempt,  and  it  was  always 


The  Kaiser, 

not  the 
Reichstag, 
in  control 


Militarism 


1G8 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Zabern 
Affair 


Treatment 
of  subject 
races 


difficult  in  such  instances  to  get  any  redress  from  the 
courts.  A  notorious  instance,  known  abroad  better  than 
any  of  the  others,  was  the  Zabern  Affair.  In  1913  a  certain 
Lieutenant  von  Forstner  at  Zabern  in  Alsace  spoke  con- 
temptuously of  the  citizens  there,  and  declared  that  in- 
stead of  punishing  a  soldier  who  had  stabbed  an  Alsatian, 
he  would  have  given  him  a  reward  for  his  trouble.  The 
townsmen,  already  weary  of  the  conduct  of  the  soldiers, 
showed  their  dislike,  and  presently  the  lieutenant  in  his 
wrath  struck  a  lame  cobbler  on  the  forehead  with  his 
sword.  Against  such  militarism  public  sentiment  in  Ger- 
many was  aroused  and  the  matter  went  to  the  Reichs- 
tag, where  it  was  bitterly  condemned.  Von  Forstner  was 
tried  by  court  martial,  but  no  punishment  followed. 
There  were  mass  meetings  in  Germany  to  protest,  and 
much  feeling  was  aroused;  but  that  year  the  government 
was  teaching  the  people  that  great  danger  threatened  the 
country,  especially  from  the  Russians,  and  the  German 
army  was  increased  to  greater  size  than  ever  before. 

Essentially  autocratic  rule  associated  with  militarism 
caused  the  treatment  accorded  to  the  alien  subjects  in  the 
Empire.  The  English-speaking  peoples  had  grown  great 
partly  by  attracting  others  to  themselves,  and  such  as- 
similation as  there  was  came  largely  from  generous  tolera- 
tion. French  Canadians  were  never  troubled  about  their 
religion  or  their  language,  and  the  Boers  within  the  British 
Empire  kept  all  the  rights  they  had  fought  to  defend. 
Even  in  Ireland,  where  England's  greatest  failure  had 
been,  Irishmen  were  never  coerced  into  abandoning  the 
Gaelic  language,  though  in  the  course  of  time  most  of  them 
of  their  own  accord  adopted  English.  But  in  countries 
like  Russia  and  Germany,  of  the  regime  before  the  Great 
War,  it  seemed  to  the  rulers  all-important  that  all  their 
subjects  should  be  respectively  Russian  or  German. 
Accordingly,  in  Russia  the  Poles  and  the  Finns  were 
subjected  to  grievous  persecution.     In  the  German  Em- 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE 


169 


pire  Frenchmen  of  Alsace-Lorraine,  Danes  in  Schleswig, 
and  the  Poles  of  Posen,  were  treated  as  inferiors  and  sub- 
jected to  discriminations  in  the  hope  of  making  tliem 
thoroughly  German. 

When  in  1871  Alsace-Lorraine  was  annexed  to  the 
Empire  the  inluibitants,  though  most  of  them  were  more 
German  than  French  by  race,  were  strongly  attached  to 
France,  and  protested  at  the  forcible  separation.  Bis- 
marck believed  that,  with  the  passing  away  of  the  genera- 
tion that  had  known  French  rule,  attachment  to  France 
would  disappear.  The  strongest  French  sympathizers  left 
the  country,  and  their  places  were  taken  by  immigrants 
from  the  German  states  of  the  Empire.  But  Alsace- 
Lorraine  was  given  a  dependent  and  inferior  status,  as 
the  Reichslandy  or  imperial  territory.  It  had  neither 
influence  in  the  Empire  nor  sufficient  self-government 
for  itself.  Therefore,  as  time  passed,  the  feeling  of  dis- 
content did  not  w\ane;  love  of  the  old  memories  of  France 
did  not  die;  and  German  immigrants  themselves  de- 
nounced the  treatment  of  the  Reichdand.  The  German 
authorities,  who  have  usually  not  been  able  to  conciliate 
other  peoples,  as  the  English  and  the  French  have  done, 
but  have  relied  on  strong  methods  and  force,  strove  to 
compel  obedience  and  contentment.  They  only  increased 
the  irritation.  This  made  a  dangerous  situation  which 
they  tried  to  meet  by  adding  to  the  garrisons  and  subject- 
ing the  provinces  to  very  strict  military  rule.  This  was  re- 
sented still  further.  As  far  as  possible  French  things  were 
proscribed,  and  one  boy  of  twelve  was  imprisoned  for 
whistling  the  Marseillaise.  German  rulers  did  not  realize 
as  clearly  as  some  foreigners  that  what  the  inhabitants  of 
the  Reichsland  wanted  most  of  all  was  not  return  to  France 
but  self-government.  In  1911  a  new  constitution  was 
granted,  but  it  was  not  satisfactory  to  the  people.  After 
forty  years  nothing,  aside  from  force,  really  held  the 
population  to  the  Empire  except  their  mcreasingly  prosper- 


Alsace- 
Lorraine 


Continued 
resentment 


170  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

ous  industrial  life,  closely  connected  with  German  industry 
and  mostly  dependent  upon  it. 
The  Poles  The  Germans  so  dealt  with  these  provinces  largely  be- 

in  the  east-     cause  of  their  strategic  position,  and  because  military 
era  districts      considerations    seemed    all-important.     German    leaders 
would  have  felt  safer  if  the  Reichsland  had  been  inhabited 
entirely  by  Germans.     The  same  reasons  had  much  to  do 
with  their  treatment  of  the  Poles  in  West  Prussia  and 
Posen.    The  Polish  districts  of  Prussia  lay  right  where  Rus- 
sian invaders  might  strike  deep  into  the  Empire.    This 
country,  when  taken  from  Poland,  had  contained  many 
people  who  spoke  German ;  and  in  time,  with  good  treat- 
ment, all  of  the  inhabitants  might  have  been  made  loyal 
subjects.     It  was  considered  necessary,  however,  to  make 
them  thoroughly  German,  especially   after  the  Kultur- 
himpf  had  aroused  in  the  Catholic  Poles  a  strong  feeling 
of  Polish  nationality.     Bismarck  wished  to  prevent  the 
use  of  Polish  in  their  public  schools,  and  he  desired  to 
populate  the  country  with  German  peasants;  but  presently 
more  lenient  treatment  was  accorded.     Repressive  meas- 
ures were  undertaken  in  earnest,  however,  after  a  while, 
when  it  was  seen  clearly  that  the  Poles  were  not  giving  up 
their  own  national  feeling.     As  in  Alsace-Lorraine,  news- 
papers  were   suppressed   and   many   people    fined    and 
imprisoned.     In   1901  it  was  ordered  that  religious  in- 
struction  in   the   schools   should  be  given   in   German. 
Polish  teachers  were  taken  from  their  positions,  school 
children  were  forbidden  to  pray  in  Polish,  and  Poles  were 
forbidden  to  use  their  language  in  public  assemblies.     In 
1907  the  Prussian  Government  passed  a  law  by  which 
Polish  owners  might  be  compelled  to  sell  their  land,  so  that 
their  estates  might  get  into  German  possession;  and  in 
1913  a  large  sum  of  money  was  appropriated  for  the  pur- 
pose of  colonizing  Prussian  Poland  with  Germans.     Polish 
peasants  were  even  forbidden  to  build  houses  upon  their 
own  land.     But  despite  the  severity  of  this  persecution, 


THE    GERMAN    EMPIRE  171 

little  more  was  accomplislicd  than  making'  the  Polish  sub- 
jects of  the  Empire  l)urii  with  hatred,  and  desire  free- 
dom from  the  rule  of  the  masters  who  oppressed  them. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  J.  E.  Barker,  Modern  Gennant/  (lOOo,  last 
ed.  1919);  H.  Blum,  Das  Deutsche  Reich  ziir  Zeit  liismarcks 
(1893);  W.  H.  Dawson,  The  Evulutiun  of  Modern  Germany  (1908, 
new  ed.  1919);  R.  H.  Fife,  Jr.,  The  German  Empire  Between  Two 
Wars  (1916);  Karl  Laniprecht,  Deutsche  Geschichte  der  Jungsten 
V ergangenheit  und  Gegenwart,  2  vols.  (1912-13);  Henri  Licten- 
berger,  U Allemagne^Moderne;  Son  Evolutum  (1907),  trans,  by 
A.  M.  Ludovici  (1913);  H.  von  Sybel,  Die  Begriindung  des 
Deutschen  Reichs  durch  Wilhelm  I,  7  vols,  (5th  ed.  revised,  1889- 
94),  biassed,  but  based  upon  the  sources;  Charles  Tower,  Ger- 
vianyof  To-day  (WIS). 

Bismarck:  the  best  biography  in  English  is  C.  G.  Robertson, 
Bismarck  (1919);  in  German  the  best  is  Erich  Marcks,  Otto  von 
Bismarck:  ein  Lebensbild  (1918),  and  a  larger  work;  Bismarck: 
eine  Biographie,  Volume  I  (1909);  H.  Blum,  Fiirst  Bismarck  und 
Seine  Zeit,  6  vols.  (1894-5);  G.  Egelhaaf,  Bismarck,  Sein  Leben 
und  Sein  Werk  (1911) ;  J.  W.  Headlam,  Bismarck  and  the  Founda- 
tion of  the  German  Empire  (1899);  H.  Kohl,  Furst  Bismarck: 
Regesten  zu  einer  Wissenschaftlichen  Biographie,  2  vols.  (1891-2), 
containing  important  parts  of  letters  and  speeches;  jVIoritz 
Busch  (English  trans.),  Bismarck — Some  Secret  Pages  of  Ilia 
History,  2  vols.  (1898),  the  diary  of  one  who  had  official  and 
private  intercourse  with  Bismarck;  Max  I^nz,  Geschichte  Bis- 
marcks  (1902);  C.  Lowe,  Prince  Bismarck:  an  Historical  Biog- 
raphy, 2  vols.  (1886);  Paul  Matter,  Bis7narck  et  son  Temps. 
3  vols.  (1905-8),  perhaps  the  best  of  the  longer  biographies  at 
present;  J.  Penzler,  Fiirst  Bismarck  nach  Seiner  Entlassung 
(1897-8);  Munroe  Smith,  Bismarck  and  German  Unity  (2d  ed. 
1910). 

Bismarck's  utterances  and  writings:  Otto,  Fiirst  von  Bis- 
marck, Gedanken  und  Erinnerungen,  2  vols.  (1898),  Vol.  HI 
(1919),  Vols.  I  and  II  trans,  by  A.  J.  Butler,  Rejiections  and  Reini- 
niscences,  2  vols.  (1899);  II.  Kohl,  Wegweiser  durch  Bismarcks 
Gedanken  und  Erinnerungen  (1898);  L.  Hahn,  Fiirst  Bismarck, 
Sein  Politisches  Leben  und  Wirken,  5  vols.  (1878-91),  for  speeches 
dispatches,  and  political  letters;  H.  Kohl,  Die  Politischen  Reden 


172  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

des  Fiirsien  Bismarck,  14  vols.  (1892-1905);  Hermann  Hofmann, 
Fiirst  Bimiarck,  1890-189S,  2  vols.  (1913),  contains  Bismarck's 
important  critical  contributions  to  the  Hamburger  Nachrichten. 

Other  biographies:  Erich  Marcks,  Kaiser  Wilhelm  I  (5th  ed. 
1905),  excellent. 

Government :  if  the  student  finds  it  desirable  and  convenient, 
he  will  obtain  a  vast  amount  of  curious  and  interesting  informa- 
tion from  the  proceedings  of  the  Reichstag — Stenographische 
Berichte  iiher  die  Verhandhingen  des  Reichstags  (1871-);  B.  E. 
Howard,  The  German  Empire  (1906) ;  Paul  Laband,  Das  Staats- 
recht  des  Deutschen  Reiches,  4  vols.  (4th  ed.  1901),  the  stand- 
ard treatise,  Deutsches  Reichsstaatsrecht  (6th  ed.  1912);  H.  G. 
James,  Principles  of  Prussian  Administration  (1913);  Gaetan 
(Vicomte)  Combes  de  Lestrade,  Les  Monarchies  de  VEmpire 
Alleniand,  Organisation  Constitutionelle  et  Administrative  (1904), 
excellent;  Oskar  Stillich,  Die  Politischen  Parteien  in  Deutschland, 
Vols.  I,  II  (1908,  1911);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Municipal  Life  and 
Government  in  Germany  (1914). 

The  Kulturkampf:  Ludwig  Halin,  Geschichte  des  Kultur- 
kampfes  in  Preussen  (1881),  contains  documents;  Georges  Goyau, 
Bismarck  et  VEglise:  le  Culturkampf,  1870-1887,  4  vols.  (1911- 
13),  best  on  the  subject. 

Protection  and  economic  life:  W.  H.  Dawson,  Protection  in 
Germany  (1904),  best;  Werner  Sombart,  Die  Deutsche  Volkswirt- 
schaft  im  Neunzehnten  Jahrhundert  (1903). 

Socialism  and  the  State:  Charles  Andler,  Les  Origines  du 
Socialisme  d'etat  en  Allemagne  (ed.  1911);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Bis- 
marck and  State  Socialism  (1891),  The  German  Workman  (1906), 
Social  Insurance  in  Germany,  1883-1911  (1912),  all  excellent. 
August  Bebel,  Aiis  Meinem  Leben,  3  vols.  (1910-14),  abridged 
trans.  My  Life  (1912). 

Alsace-Lorraine:  Barry  Cerf,  Alsace-Lorraine  Since  1870 
(1919) ;  C.  D.  Hazen,  Alsace-Lorraine  Under  German  Ride  (1917). 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  LEADERSHIP  OF  GERMANY— THE 
TRIPLE  ALLIANCE 

L.  L.  M.  M.  I'empereur  d'Autriche,  roi  de  Boheme  etc.  ct  roi  aposto- 
lique  de  Hongrie,  rcmpereur  d'Allcmagne,  roi  de  Prusse  et  le  roi 
d'ltalie,  animeos  du  dcsir  (raugmcnter  les  garanties  de  la  paix 
generale,  de  fortifier  le  principe  moriarchique  et  d'assurer  par  eela- 
meme  le  mantieii  intacte  de  I'ordre  sociale  et  politicjue  dans  leurs 
etats  respeetifs,  sont  tomhees  d'accord  de  conelure  uii  traite.  .  . 
The  Triple  iVIliance,  May  20,  1882. 

Wir  liegen  mitten  in  Europa.  Wir  haben  mindestens  drei  Angriffs- 
fronten.  .  .  .  Gott  hat  uns  in  eine  Situation  gesetzt,  in  wel- 
cher  wir  durch  unsere  Nachbarn  daran  verhindert  werdcn,  irgenfl- 
wie  in  Triigheit  oder  Versunipfung  zu  gerathen.  Er  hat  uns  die 
kriegerischste  unfl  unruhigste  Nation,  die  Franzosen,  an  die  Seite 
gesetzt,  und  er  hat  in  Ilussland  kriegcrisehe  Neigungen  gross  wer- 
den  lassen.  .  .  .  Wir  Deutschen  furchten  Gott,  aber  sonst 
nichts  in  der  Welt. 

Bismarck  in  the  Reichstag,  February  6,  1888;  Stenographisc/ie 
Berichtc,  1887-1888,  pp.  727,  728,  733. 

.     .     .     hold  fast  to  the  conviction  that  our  God  would  never  have 
taken  such  great  pains  with  our  German  Fatherland  and  its  people 
if  he  had  not  been  preparing  us  for  something  still  greater. 
Speech  of  ^YILUAM  II  at  Bremen,  March  22,  1905. 

After  1871  Bismarck's  greater  tasks  had  to  do  \\\\\\  Bismarck's 
foreign  affairs.  The  new  German  Empire  was  a  powerful  ^'^"^^ 
state  of  41,000,000  people.  It  was  larger  than  France,  in 
strong  military  po.sition,  flushed  with  victory,  and  with  the 
prestige  of  unparalleled  success.  But  it  was  also  a  new 
state,  a  newcomer  among  old  neighbors,  apt  to  be  regarded 
as  an  upstart  and  an  intruder.  Its  very  appearance 
had  completely  upset  the  old  balance  of  power,  and  there 
was  bound  to  be  some  difficulty  in  adjusting  the  equi- 

173 


174 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  prob- 
lems con- 
fronting 
Bismarck 


The  situa- 
tion in 
Europe 


librium  again.  The  German  Empire  had  risen  on  the 
defeat  of  Austria  and  of  France.  The  Austrians  might 
try  to  regain  the  position  they  had  lost.  The  French 
proclaimed,  as  some  Germans  do  now,  that  assuredly 
they  would  have  their  revenge.  The  position  of  Germany 
was  very  strong,  for  in  between  other  great  powers  she 
could  strike  out,  if  necessary,  at  one  or  the  other;  but  the 
converse  of  this  was  that  a  hostile  alliance  of  surrounding 
powers  might  be  able  to  crush  her  completely. 

It  was  the  task  of  Bismarck  now  to  consolidate  and 
keep  what  had  just  been  gained,  to  prevent  the  for- 
mation of  an  unfriendly  alliance,  to  isolate  Germany's 
foes,  to  make  new  friends  and  keep  the  old  ones,  and 
see  that  Germany  would  never  be  taken  at  a  disadvantage 
during  the  period  of  readjustment  of  affairs.  He  suc- 
ceeded magnificently  in  all  of  this.  Great  as  had  been  his 
success  in  making  possible  the  unification  of  Germany,  his 
success  in  keeping  the  unity,  prosperity,  and  commanding 
position  of  the  German  Empire  now  was  still  more  striking. 
When  in  1890  he  retired  from  the  management  of  public 
affairs,  the  foundations  of  the  Empire  seemed  impregnable. 
Germany  was  the  center  of  a  powerful  alliance;  and  was  on 
friendly  terms  with  most  of  the  other  great  powers;  while 
France  continued  in  the  lonely  isolation  in  which  her  dis- 
aster had  left  her. 

When  Bismarck  began  his  great  schemes  against  Austria 
and  France  he  had  already  assured  himself  of  the  friend- 
ship of  Italy  and  Russia.  With  these  powers  he  continued 
on  excellent  terms  after  1871,  and  did  all  that  he  could  to 
strengthen  the  connection.  Great  Britain  had  been  in- 
creasingly alarmed  at  the  actions  of  Prussia  from  1864 
to  1871,  and  among  the  British  people  there  was  no  little 
sympathy  for  France  during  the  terrible  winter  of  the  war. 
But  this  was  a  period  when  historians  and  novelists  in 
England  loved  to  think  of  the  Teutonic  origin  of  their 
people  and  the  excellence  of  all  things  Germanic;  so  that 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


175 


for  some  time  many  Englishmen  felt  tliat  tliere  were  very 
close  ties  of  relationship  between  tlie  Germans  and  them- 
selves. IMoreover,  sinee  the  ending  of  the  Napoleonic 
wars,  the  activities  of  Britain  had  gone  mostly  into  the 
administration  of  her  ever -widening  Empire,  British 
leaders  wished  to  avoid  entanglements  in  Europe,  and 
remain  secure  in  "splendid  isolation." 

At  once  Bismarck  proceeded  to  grander  designs.  He 
desired  to  draw  together  in  close  friendship  and  alliance 
the  German  Empire,  Austria-Hungary,  and  Russia.  He 
had  had  something  of  this  in  mind  in  1866,  when  terms 
were  made  with  Austria  defeated.  By  the  Peace  of  Prague 
Austria  lost  no  territory  to  Prussia,  and  paid  almost  no 
indemnity,  while  everything  possible  was  done  to  soothe 
the  feelings  of  the  vanquished.  Accordingly,  it  was  not 
difficult  to  bring  about  good  understanding  again.  In 
1872,  after  skilful  arranging,  the  emperors  of  Russia, 
Austria,  and  the  German  Empire  were  brought  together 
in  Berlin,  where  they  arrived  at  a  cordial  agreement. 
No  alliance  was  concluded;  but  this  understanding  of  the 
three  rulers  so  far  effected  Bismarck's  plan  of  a  new 
group  of  powers  which  would  include  the  new  German 
Empire  that  there  was  not  any  great  misconception 
involved  when  people  spoke  of  it  as  the  League  of  Three 
Emperors  {Dreikaiserhund) . 

For  six  years  this  condition  continued,  and  Bismarck 
had  little  to  fear,  with  Italy  friendly,  and  England  holding 
aloof.  But  now  there  developed  another  great  change 
which  made  impossible  continued  intimate  connection 
with  Austria-Hungary  and  Russia  at  the  same  time;  for 
they  came  into  such  opposition  that  not  even  his  masterly 
skill  sufficed  to  hold  them  together.  Russia  and  Austria 
were  rivals  for  the  same  thing,  and  by  1878  could  no  longer 
be  good  friends,  since  they  could  not  each  have  the  object 
desired,  which  both  of  them  greatly  wanted 

For  a  long  time  the  Russian  people  had  been  extending 


The  Drei- 
kaiserhund 


Austria- 
Hungary 
and  Russia 


176 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Expansion  of 
Russia  to 
the  south- 
west 


Expansion  of 
Austria  to 
the  south 


westward  and  southward,  always  hoping  for  some  good 
outlet  on  the  sea,  and  looking  forward  to  the  day  when 
expansion  down  through  the  Balkans  would  bring  them  to 
Constantinople,  mother  of  their  civilization  and  faith. 
From  the  Turk  they  had  already  taken  much  land  on  the 
northern  shore  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  now  it  seemed  to 
them  that  ambition  and  destiny  both  called  them  forward 
down  the  west  shore,  to  free  the  Christian,  Slavic  peoples 
in  the  Balkan  peninsula,  and  to  drive  the  Turks  out  of 
tlieir  great  city  at  last.  But  meanwhile  Austria  was 
reviving  her  ambitions  to  take  Balkan  territory  from  the 
Turk.  In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries,  when 
Ottoman  power  in  Europe  was  at  its  zenith,  Austria  was 
the  bulwark  of  Christian  Europe  against  the  Turk.  It 
was  to  her  that  the  submerged  Christian  peoples  to  the 
south  looked  for  their  future  deliverance;  and  she  did 
enlarge  her  dominions  by  southward  expansion  when 
the  power  of  the  Turk  began  to  wane.  After  a  while 
her  ambitions  were  turned  in  this  direction  more  than 
ever  before.  Once  she  had  had  great  influence  in  northern 
Europe.  The  Treaty  of  Utrecht  (1713)  gave  her  that 
part  of  the  Netherlands  which  was  afterward  known  as 
Belgium,  and  for  a  long  while  she  was  leader  among  the 
German  states.  But  the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution 
took  away  her  Austrian  Netherlands,  and  in  1866  she 
was  thrust  out  of  the  community  of  the  German  peoples. 
At  the  same  time  she  had  just  lost  her  hold  on  the  Italian 
peninsula.  But  her  ambitions  rose  quickly  again.  As 
soon  as  the  Austrians  and  the  Hungarians  reached  agree- 
ment, and  good  relations  began  with  the  new  German 
Empire,  the  hopes  of  the  leaders  in  the  Dual  Monarchy 
turned  to  new  expansion,  and  it  seemed  now  that  the  best 
chance  for  this  was  down  the  Adriatic,  perhaps,  through 
the  Balkan  peninsula  to  the  Mgean.  So  it  happened  that 
in  this  period  the  ambitions  of  Russia  and  Austria- 
Hungary  thwarted  each  other.     Each  strove  for  influence 


"V 


\   RUSSIA 


^Budapest  /*/"*  \      "31 

H  /  TI     N     G     A     R     Y  "L.N  \  ^ 

n/    U       1>I       Vj      /\       l\        I         ^  MOLDAVIA'  ^^ 

/  ^ 

* 

SLAVONTA 

.  R   U  M  A  N    I 

^'iT'V-W^^^i  WALLACHIA 

BOSNIA!  Ilelsrado     i^  >; 


IONIAN 
SEA 


^    S^ 


...Turco  Serbian  and  Turco 
Montenegrian  Boundaries 

\y^/^//\  Bulgaria 

Scale  of  Miles 

0  50  100  150 

GENERAL   OdAFllHG  CO. INC  NY 


-•    ^^, 


Rhcde$ 


<?> 


A 


oCREtE  OR  CANDIA 

3IEDITERRANEAN  SEA 


8.    THE  TREATY  OF  SAN  STEF/iNO 

177 


178 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Russo- 
Turkish  War 


The  Con- 
gress of 
Berlin,  1878 


Conse- 
quences: 
Russia  and 
Prussia  drift 
apart 


among  the  Balkan  peoples  and  tried  by  all  means  to  hinder 
the  other  from  securing  advantage.  In  1878  a  great 
crisis  came,  when  Russia,  eager  to  extend  her  power,  but 
also  sincerely  aroused  at  the  atrocities  perpetrated  by 
Turks  on  the  Bulgarian  people,  began  the  Russo-Turkish 
"War  (1877-8),  and,  after  a  fierce  struggle,  shattered  the 
enemy's  resistance  and  forced  the  signing  of  a  treaty  which 
destroyed  the  power  of  Turkey  in  Europe.  The  subject 
peoples  were  set  free,  and  most  of  the  Ottoman  territory 
in  Europe  was  given  to  a  new  large  Bulgarian  state,  which, 
it  was  then  believed,  would  be  dependent  on  Russia. 

But  this  treaty  was  not  allowed  to  stand.  A  British 
fleet  prepared  for  action  near  Constantinople,  and  Austria- 
Hungary  also  let  it  be  known  that  such  a  settlement  was  not 
satisfactory.  In  the  following  critical  months  the  Russian 
ambassador  to  Great  Britain  reached  a  partial  under- 
standing with  the  British  Government;  and  meanwhile 
Russia  consented  to  submit  the  treaty  to  a  congress  of  the 
powers.  June  13,  such  a  congress  met  at  Berlin.  Bis- 
marck, who  had  declared  that  Germany  had  no  territorial 
claims  in  the  Balkans,  and  that  he  would  be  glad  to  act  as 
an  "honest  broker"  between  the  others,  was  elected  presi- 
dent the  first  day.  By  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  which  fol- 
lowed, Russia  suffered  a  great  diplomatic  defeat.  What 
she  had  done  in  the  Balkans  was  largely  undone.  The 
Bulgaria  she  proposed  to  establish  was  greatly  reduced, 
while  Austria-Hungary,  who  had  taken  no  part  in  defeat- 
ing the  Turks,  got  the  right  to  administer  the  two  Turkish 
provinces  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  which  lay  contigu- 
ous to  her  and  now  extended  her  dominion  far  southward. 

The  Congress  and  the  Treaty  of  Berlin  mark  an  epoch 
in  the  recent  history  of  Europe.  Many  great  consquences 
were  to  follow  from  the  work  of  the  diplomats  who  went 
there,  but  one  of  the  first  important  results  was  the  ending 
of  the  close  friendship  which  had  existed  between  Russia 
and  Prussia  since  Prussia's  friendly  attitude  to  Russia 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


179 


during  the  Polish  rebellion  of  1803.  Gorlchakov,  the  Rus- 
sian chaneellor,  who  already  disliked  Bismarck,  believed 
that  such  humiliation  would  not  Iiave  come  to  his  country 
had  he  received  German  support.  In  18GC  Russia  had  been 
friendly  to  Prussia,  and  in  1870  she  had  even  done  some- 
thing to  keep  Austria  from  assisting  France.  Now  in  her 
time  of  need  the  German  Empire  had  done  nothing  for  her. 
Russia  had  desired  an  ofl'ensive  and  defensive  alliance  with 
Germany,  but  Bismarck  had  refused;  and  forced  at  last  to 
make  his  choice,  he  now^  chose  Austria  rather  than  Russia. 
Perhaps  he  feared  that  since  Russia  was  opposing  most  of 
the  principal  European  powers,  Germany  in  alliance  with 
Russia  would  have  to  oppose  them  also,  and  would  thence 
be  made  too  dependent  on  Russia's  good  wall  in  the  future. 
At  all  events,  cordial  friendship  between  them  now  came 
to  an  end  for  the  time. 

For  the  moment  Germany  was  isolated,  and  there  was 
danger  that  Russia  might  seek  alliance  with  either  Austria 
or  France.  But  the  danger  soon  passed.  In  October, 
1879,  after  brief  negotiations,  an  alliance  was  concluded 
between  the  German  Empire  and  Austria-Hungary.  By 
the  terms  of  this  agreement,  kept  secret  then  but  after- 
ward pubhshed,  "the  two  High  Contracting  Parties" 
were  bound  to  stand  by  each  other  with  all  their  armed 
forces  if  either  one  were  attacked  by  Russia;  in  case  either 
were  attacked  by  some  other  power  than  Russia  "the 
other  High  Contracting  Party"  would  observe  "at  least 
an  attitude  of  benevolent  neutrality  "  toward  the  partner 
in  the  treaty;  but  if  the  powder  attacking  were  supported 
by  Russia,  then  the  two  High  Contracting  Parties  would 
wage  war  jointly  until  peace  was  concluded  by  them  to- 
gether. 

Scarcely  had  this  Dual  Alliance  given  the  security 
Bismarck  desired  when  he  extended  it  to  make  the  well- 
known  Triple  Alliance,  which  endured  until  the  time  of 
the  Great  War.    This  was  done  by  drawing  Italy  to  the  two 


Indignation 
in  Russia 


Alliance  be- 
tween the 
German  Em- 
pire and 
Austria- 
Hungary, 
1879 


Italy  joins 
the  Triple 
Alliance, 
1882 


180 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Italy  and 
Austria- 
Hungary 


Italy  and 
France 


Rivalry  and 
ambition 


Central  Powers.  The  general  interests  of  Italy  did  not 
seem  to  lie  in  such  company,  since  she  must  have  as  one  of 
her  partners  Austria-Hungary,  long  Italy's  master  and 
oppressor,  who  only  a  few  years  before  had  been  expelled 
from  the  peninsula,  who  still  held  many  Italians  as  un- 
willing subjects,  and  against  whom  Italians  cherished 
bitter  hatred  from  recollection  of  a  thousand  acts  of 
tyranny  and  evil.  Moreover,  the  spirit  of  the  Italian 
people  and  the  ties  of  language,  law,  and  custom,  bound 
them  rather  to  France  than  the  German  Empire.  But 
there  were  then,  as  there  were  later  on,  reasons  why  the 
Italians  should  feel  hostile  to  France. 

In  1915  Italy  joined  the  Allies  against  Austria-Hungary 
and  Germany,  and  after  valiant  and  exhausting  endeav- 
ors contributed  to  the  victory  which  followed.  During 
the  course  of  the  struggle  it  seemed  to  observers  that  Italy 
and  France  were  drawn  together  by  common  sufferings 
and  efforts  as  never  before.  But  scarcely  was  the  struggle 
at  an  end  when  bitter  causes  of  difference  arose  almost  at 
once.  Italy  wished  to  have  the  opposite  coast  of  the 
Adriatic  and  become  the  controlling  power  in  what  had 
been  the  southern  Slavic  dominions  of  the  former  Austro- 
Hungarian  state.  France  hoped  that  upon  the  ruins 
of  the  fallen  Dual  Monarchy  would  rise  new  Slavic  com- 
monwealths partly  dependent  on  herself.  Accordingly, 
there  was  such  immediate  conflict  of  ambition  and  desires 
between  Italy  and  France,  that  already  in  1919  predictions 
were  being  made  that  Italy  would  renew  her  connection 
with  Germany  as  soon  as  she  could. 

So  it  was  when  Bismarck  sought  to  draw  Italy  into  his 
schemes.  Only  a  few  years  before  the  Austrian  armies  had 
been  overthrown  and  Italy's  unity  forwarded  through  the 
powerful  assistance  of  France.  But  since  1859  several 
things  had  occurred  to  alienate  the  Italian  people.  Na- 
poleon III  had  supported  the  pope  in  maintaining  his 
temporal    power,    and    this    was   overthrown    and   uni- 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


181 


fication  completed  only  in  1870,  when  France  was  no  longer 
able  to  interfere.  Even  after  the  Franco-(iernian  War 
there  was  some  fear  that  French  intervention  might  restore 
to  the  pope  what  he  had  lost.  Fnrthermore,  Italy  was  a 
young  and  ambitious  state,  and  wislied  ardently  to  appear 
as  one  of  the  greater  powers.  Actually  this  was  beyond 
her  resources,  but  it  seemed  then  more  possible  if  she  were 
closely  associated  with  great  companions.  Finalh'  the 
direct  motive  was  craftily  supplied  by  Bismarck  himself. 
In  Algeria  France  had  long  before  begun  the  foundations 
of  her  north  African  empire.  It  was  evident  that  she 
would  be  glad  to  expand  into  the  neighboring  country 
of  Tunisia,  but  it  was  also  apparent  that  Italy  had  high 
hopes  of  getting  Tunisia  for  herself.  At  the  Congress 
of  Berlin  Bismarck  had  secretly  encouraged  France  to 
take  Tunisia,  lioping  that  if  she  were  engrossed  in  distant 
enterprises  she  would  think  less  of  a  war  of  revenge,  and 
probably  foreseeing  that  such  seizure  would  enrage  the 
Italians  and  drive  them  into  Germany's  arms. 

So  it  came  about.  In  1881  France  established  a  pro- 
tectorate over  Tunisia.  There  was  an  outburst  of  in- 
dignation in  Italy,  and  the  statesmen  of  Rome,  hearkening 
to  the  persuasion  of  Bismarck,  joined  Germany  and  Austria- 
Hungary  in  alliance.  Thus  did  Italy  ally  herself  with 
an  old  enemy  and  a  recent  friend.  No  little  gain  came  to 
her.  When  in  186G  she  had  obtained  Venetia  from  Aus- 
tria, the  strong  places  on  the  border  all  remained  in  Aus- 
tria's hands,  and  Italy  with  weak  and  exposed  frontier 
was  always  at  the  mercy  of  an  Austrian  attack.  From 
this  danger  she  was  now  freed  by  being  associated  wili 
Austria-Hungary,  and  by  being  in  some  sort  under  German 
protection.  More  and  more  did  she  come  under  German 
influence;  and  in  the  follow^'ng  years  German  merchants 
and  financiers  almost  got  economic  control  of  the  country. 
In  course  of  time,  however,  as  Italy  grew  stronger  and  less 
afraid  of  Austria-Hungary,  she  grew  more  ambitious  and 


Rivalry 

about 

Tunisia 


Italy  added 
to  the  Ger- 
manic alli- 
ance, 1882 


German 
influence 
in  Italy 


182 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Austro- 
German 
Treaty  of 
1879  the 
principal 
link  between 
the  Central 
Powers 


The  treaties 
of  the  Triple 
Alliance 


hoped  to  secure  larger  control  of  the  Adriatic  for  herself. 
Thus  she  came  into  conflict  with  Austria,  and  in  the  end 
it  was  almost  as  difficult  for  Germany  to  reconcile  her 
partners  in  the  Triple  Alliance  as  once  it  had  been  for 
Bismarck  to  hold  Austria  and  Russia  together.  The 
Alliance  was  renewed  again  and  again,  and  it  lasted  long 
beyond  Bismarck's  time.  But  before  the  Great  War  be- 
gan Italy  was  an  unwilling  member;  during  that  struggle 
she  withdrew;  and  the  war  broke  the  Alliance  to  pieces. 

The  history,  the  development,  the  character  of  the 
engagements  binding  Germany,  Austria-Hungary,  and 
Italy  long  remained  enveloped  in  secrecy,  to  be  guessed 
at  by  outsiders  and  ill  understood.  It  was  assumed  that, 
roughly,  their  general  character  was  known,  but  when, 
after  the  downfall  of  Austria-Hungary  in  1918,  the  archives 
of  Vienna  were  examined  and  the  secret  treaties  of  the 
Alliance  made  known,  it  was  evident  that  much  had 
remained  concealed.  It  was  then  apparent  that  always 
the  basis  and  strongest  part  of  the  arrangement  was  the 
Austro-German  Treaty,  the  treaty  of  alliance  concluded 
between  the  German  Empire  and  Austria-Hungary  in 
1879.  The  duration  of  this  treaty  had  been  fixed  at  five 
years,  but  in  accordance  with  its  third  article,  which  had 
remained  undivulged,  provision  had  been  made  for  the 
automatic  continuance  of  the  arrangement  for  periods  of 
three  years,  in  case  neither  partner  desired  otherwise. 
In  1902,  after  a  conference  concerning  the  continuance  of 
the  Treaty,  it  was  specifically  agreed  that  the  Treaty 
should  be  automatically  renewed  each  three  years.  Mean- 
while, in  188S,  it  had  been  renewed  for  a  five-year  period, 
to  end  in  1889.  It  was  this  treaty,  and  this  one  only, 
which  obligated  the  German  Empire  to  assist  the  Dual 
Monarchy  if  it  were  attacked  by  Russia. 

Supplementary  to  this  agreement  and  less  important, 
but  parallel  to  it,  was  the  Triple  Alliance  proper.  The 
treaty  of  this  alliance  was  made  in  1882.     It  was  renewed 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


183 


in  1887,  at  which  time  were  added  a  separate  treaty  l)e- 
tween  Austria-Hungary  and  Italy  concerning  the  Balkans 
and  another  treaty  between  the  German  lunpire  and 
Italy  directed  against  France.  In  1891  these  three  treaties 
were  consolidated  in  the  third  Treaty  of  the  Triple  Alli- 
ance. Von  Billow,  the  German  statesman,  afterward 
declared  that  the  Triple  Alliance  was  "an  insurance  com- 
pany" and  not  a  "company  for  profit."  It  had,  indeed, 
been  purely  defensive  at  first,  but  after  1891  it  contained 
provisions  which  contemplated  the  possibility  of  aggres- 
sion against  France.  The  Treaty  was  to  continue  for  six 
years,  and  for  an  additional  six  thereafter  if  not  denounced. 
In  1902  it  was  specifically  renewed  unchanged,  as  it  was 
again  in  1912.  It  is  now  known  that  the  Triple  Alliance 
did  not  provide  any  definite  military  stipulations,  though 
a  convention  between  Germany  and  Italy  in  1888  provided 
for  the  employment  of  Italian  troops  against  France.  Naval 
agreements,  on  the  other  hand,  were  made:  in  1900  for  in- 
dependent naval  operations  by  the  partners;  in  1913  for 
joint  naval  action,  the  scheme  being  drawn  up  in  detail. 

From  the  first  the  friendship  or  benevolent  attitude  of 
Great  Britain  was  desired.  In  the  first  Treaty  of  the 
Triple  Alliance  in  1882  protocols  attached  declared  that 
the  contracting  parties  had  no  hostile  intentions 
toward  England.  Five  years  later  Great  Britain,  Austria- 
Hungary,  and  Italy  came  to  an  agreement  concerning  the 
Mediterranean.  In  the  same  year  such  an  agreement 
was  made  between  Italy  and  Spain,  to  which  Austria- 
Hungary  acceded;  and  this  was  prolonged  in  1891. 
Knowledge  of  these  arrangements  makes  clear  now  what 
was  only  feared  or  suspected  then,  how  complete  was  the 
isolation  of  France,  and  how  dangerous,  indeed,  was  her 
position.  In  the  third  Treaty  of  the  Triple  Alliance  in 
1891  a  protocol  asserted  the  adherence  in  principle  of 
England  to  certain  stipulations  of  the  arrangement,  and 
declared  that  the  contracting  parties  should  exert  them- 


Character  of 
the  Triple 
Alliance 


Great  Brit- 
ain, Italy, 
and  the 
Triple  Alli- 
ance 


184 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Great  Brit- 
ain draws 
away 


Rumania 
attached  to 
the  Alliance 


Jlegemony 
of  the 
German 
Empire 


selves  to  obtain  her  adherence  respecting  other  matters 
also.  This  was  the  moment  of  England's  closest  approach 
to  the  Triple  Alliance,  and  marked  the  culmination  of  the 
power  of  the  Alliance.  In  the  next  decade  Germany  and 
Great  Britain  began  to  drift  apart,  and  as  this  took  place 
Italy  partly  fell  away.  From  the  start  it  had  been  evi- 
dent that  Italy,  entirely  at  the  mercy  of  the  principal  sea 
power,  would  never  be  willing  to  oppose  England.  In  1896 
she  formally  notified  the  Central  Powers  that  she  could  not 
fight  against  France  together  with  England.  A  few  years 
later  Italy  came  to  a  separate  understanding  with  France 
concerning  Tripoli,  thus  making  a  "re-insurance  treaty," 
since  her  former  engagements  in  the  Triple  Alliance  were 
renewed,  with  their  stipulations  directed  against  France. 

But  while  Italy  was  getting  from  the  Triple  Alliance 
all  she  could,  and  yet  gradually  coming  to  be  less  depend- 
able in  it,  the  two  principal  partners,  Austria-Hungary 
and  the  German  Empire,  came  more  closely  together 
and  tried  to  strengthen  their  position  by  additional  ar- 
rangements. Not  only  Italy  but  Rumania  was  added.  In 
1883  a  treaty  of  alliance  was  concluded  between  Austria- 
Hungary  and  Rumania.  On  the  same  day  Germany 
was  added,  and  Italy  five  years  later.  This  adding  of 
Rumania  as  an  appendage  to  the  Triple  Alliance  was  re- 
newed in  1892,  1902,  and  1913.  With  respect  to  the  Bal- 
kans, Austria  strove  to  strengthen  her  position  by  making 
an  arrangement  with  Russia  in  1897,  and  with  Italy  in 
1901  and  1909. 

The  Triple  Alliance  was  to  a  considerable  extent  defen- 
sive, but  by  means  of  it  Bismarck  had  none  the  less  raised 
the  German  Empire  to  be  the  controlling  power  in  Europe, 
and  to  a  marvellous  pitch  of  greatness.  It  was  clearly 
realized  by  contemporary  statesmen  that  the  Alliance 
controlled  all  the  central  part  of  the  Continent,  extending 
from  the  northern  waters  to  the  Mediterranean,  separ- 
ating eastern  Europe  completely  from  the  west,  and  thus 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


185 


occupying  an  impregnable  position.  Within  this  territory 
were  more  than  100,000,000  people,  and  armies  of 
2,000,000  well-trained  soldiers.  It  would  have  been  the 
sheerest  madness  for  any  other  single  state  to  come  into 
conflict  with  it.  In  this  combination  the  German  Empire 
was  the  most  powerful  member  and  the  controlling  force. 
Accordingly,  after  1882,  Germany  had  a  manifest  sui)e- 
riority,  indeed  an  overlordship  or  hegemony  in  Europe, 
and  Bismarck  was  the  most  j)owerful  man  in  the  world. 

But  high  as  was  the  position  of  Germany,  and  mighty 
as  her  power  had  become,  Bismarck  increased  it  still  fur- 
ther. During  all  the  remaining  years  of  his  power  he 
succeeded  in  keeping  the  other  great  European  states 
from  entering  into  a  counter  alliance.  Thus  he  kept 
France  for  the  most  part  in  the  isolation  in  which  he 
had  placed  her.  At  the  same  time  he  tried  to  avoid 
any  misunderstanding  with  Great  Britain,  and  tried  suc- 
cessfully to  renew  the  connection  with  Russia. 

Scarcely  had  the  Alliance  of  1879  been  made  between 
Austria-Hungary  and  Germany,  when  Bismarck  tried  to 
draw  Russia  into  another  understanding  like  what  had 
existed  before  the  Congress  of  Berlin.  The  details  of  this 
very  secret  diplomacy  were  long  unknown,  but  enough 
has  recently  been  revealed  from  the  Russian  and  the 
Austrian  archives  to  explain  clearly  the  main  outlines  of 
the  thing.  Bismarck  had  little  confidence  at  first  in  the 
stability  of  the  alliance  with  Austria.  He  wished,  more- 
over, to  prevent  what  did  take  place  after  his  retirement, 
an  alliance  between  Russia  and  France.  Therefore,  in 
1881  he  succeeded  in  bringing  about  an  agreement  be- 
tween the  emperors  of  Russia,  Austria,  and  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  that  in  case  any  one  of  these  three  powers 
should  be  at  war  with  a  fourth,  the  other  two  parties  to 
the  understanding  would  preserve  a  "benevolent  neu- 
trality." This  stipulation  was  also  to  apply  in  case  of  a 
war  between  one  of  the  three  parties  and  Turkey,  provided 


Bismarck's 

foreign 

policy 


Renewal  of 
good  rela- 
tions with 
Russia 


186 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Agreement 
between 
Russia, 
Austria- 
Hungary, 
and  the 
German 
Empire 


The  "Rein- 
surance 
Treaty," 
1887 


that  an  understanding  about  such  a  war  had  already  been 
reached  between  the  parties.  The  understanding  made 
special  allowance  for  the  continuance  of  the  alliance  be- 
tween Austria-Hungary  and  Germany,  thus  making  the 
agreement  more  advantageous  to  Germany  than  to  Russia. 
Nevertheless,  by  skillful  management  Bismarck  brought 
it  about  that  the  agreement  was  renewed  with  slight 
modification  in  1884.  Three  years  later,  however,  this 
was  not  done,  for  Austria  had  been  steadily  acquir- 
ing a  more  dominating  influence  in  the  Balkans,  and 
Russian  importance  there  was  declining.  Therefore, 
Russia  was  unwilling  to  renew  the  agreement  of  1881, 
but  sought  instead  an  alliance  or  agreement  with  Germany 
alone. 

Then  Bismarck  read  to  the  Russian  ambassador  the 
terms  of  the  alliance  with  Austria,  theretofore  a  secret, 
and  let  it  be  understood  that  this  alliance  must  be  main- 
tained. But  the  two  signed  an  agreement  none  the  less. 
It  provided  that  if  one  of  the  two  contracting  parties  were 
at  war  with  a  third  power,  the  other  contracting  party 
should  maintam  benevolent  neutrality,  though  this 
provision  was  not  to  apply  in  case  of  an  attack  made  by 
one  of  the  contracting  powers  on  either  Austria  or  France, 
thus  preserving  the  alliance  with  Austria,  and  safeguarding 
Russia's  relations  with  France.  Other  articles  provided 
that  Germany  should  recognize  Russia's  rights  in  the  Bal- 
kan peninsula  and  give  her  assistance  to  Russia  in  maintain- 
ing them.  This  agreement  has  been  known  as  the  "Rein- 
surance Treaty."  In  1879  Bismarck  had  tried  to  insure 
Germany  against  attack  by  Russia  in  making  the  alliance 
with  Austria-Hungary.  Now  in  1887  he  got,  as  it  were, 
insurance  from  the  other  side,  for  by  this  very  secret 
"agreement"  he  provided  largely  against  danger  from 
France,  who,  under  the  terms  of  the  agreement,  would  not 
be  supported  by  Russia  if  she  attacked  the  German 
Empire. 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


1S7 


Seldom  has  there  been  a  diploinaey  abler  or  more 
astute.  Bismarck,  who  had  been  the  principal  founder 
of  the  Empire,  succeeded  in  keeping  all  that  had  been 
obtained.  During  the  years  since  1871  not  once  \va.s 
France  able  to  make  alliance  with  some  other  European 
power  and  so  strengthen  herself  as  to  dare  to  begin  war 
on  her  foe.  And  in  all  that  time  Germany  was  seldom 
without  close  friends,  while  during  most  of  the  years  she 
was  the  center  of  a  powerful  alliance,  and  had,  besides,  a 
friendly  understanding  with  Russia.  But  in  spite  of  the 
vast  success  which  had  come  to  his  efforts,  the  time  of  the 
chancellor  was  nearing  its  end.  His  era  wan  passing, 
and  other  men  with  other  plans  were  rising  about  him. 
By  1887  he  was  still  a  mighty  figure,  but  a  new  generation 
was  coming  forward  with  ideals  which  he  had  never 
cherished  and  which,  indeed,  he  could  scarcely  under- 
stand. 

It  had  been  his  purpose  to  unite  the  German  states  in 
a  strong  empire  and  then  make  Germany  greatest  of  the 
European  Powers.  Difficulties  in  the  way  of  German  unity 
had  baffled  German  statesmen  for  ages,  but  now  the  uni- 
fication was  accomplished  almost  completely.  Among  the 
European  states  the  German  Empire  now  towered  like  a 
giant.  These  tasks  filled  his  mind  and  the  world .  of 
diplomacy  which  he  knew.  But  meanwhile  Great  Britain 
had  been  acquiring  an  ever-larger  colonial  empire,  and 
France,  humiliated  in  Europe,  had  gone  beyond  the  seas 
and  won  for  herself  new  dominions.  All  this  had  ap- 
pealed little  to  Bismarck.  Only  late  did  he  seek  to  get 
colonies  for  Germany,  and  he  never  seems  to  have  had 
ambitions  for  Germany  in  the  Balkans  or  in  Asia.  But  all 
around  him  now  were  growing  up  young  Germans  who  saw 
a  new  world  which  could  not  be  clear  to  his  eyes.  They 
would  try  to  make  Germany  a  great  naval  power,  which 
would  bring  her  into  conflict  with  Britain,  something 
that  Bismarck  had  not  dreamed  of  doing.     They  wished 


Greatness 
of  Bis- 
marck's 
success 


The  new 
generation 
in  the  Ger- 
man Em- 
pire 


188 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  passing 
of  Bismarck 


His  achieve- 
ments 


to  have  Germany  secure  colonies  and  markets  all  over  the 
world.  They  wished  to  join  Austria-Hungary  in  pushing 
forward  in  the  Balkans,  something  that  would  bring  to  an 
end  the  possibility  of  cordial  understanding  with  Russia. 

During  the  lifetime  of  his  master,  William  I,  the  emperor 
whom  he  had  made,  his  power  continued  unshaken,  but 
after  1888  there  was  marked  change.  William  II  who 
became,  after  the  brief  reign  of  Frederick  III,  the  new 
ruler,  embodied  new  ideas  and  the  new  ambitions  which 
were  to  carry  Germany  on  so  much  further  and  at  last 
bring  her  down  to  destruction.  He  regarded  Bismarck 
with  respect,  but  gave  him  none  of  the  affectionate  con- 
fidence that  his  grandfather  so  long  had  given.  Bis- 
marck soon  found  the  management  of  affairs  no  longer 
imquestionably  in  his  hands;  while  the  young  emperor, 
himself  full  of  vigor  and  spirit,  grew  more  and  more  im- 
patient at  the  domination  of  one  who  had  so  long  been 
first  in  Europe  that  he  was  unable  to  take  second  place. 
For  more  than  a  year  relations  between  the  two  grew  more 
strained.  The  actual  government  of  the  Empire  was  in 
the  hands  of  Bismarck,  who  had  under  him  in  important 
places  members  of  his  own  family  or  friends  whom  he  had 
raised  up  to  obey  him.  But  the  new  emperor,  believing 
in  the  divine  right  of  his  rule,  and  confident  of  his  own 
capacity  to  govern,  presently  insisted  that  his  ideas  be  fol- 
lowed. In  1890  Bismarck  resigned,  after  being  told  that 
he  was  in  the  way.  It  seemed  a  strange  thing  to  the  older 
generation  that  this  could  ever  come  to  pass.  As  a 
famous  cartoon  in  Punch  portrayed  it,  to  them  it  was 
"Dropping  the  Pilot." 

Of  Bismarck's  work  it  was  long  difficult  to  form  proper  es- 
timate. So  gigantic  had  been  his  success,  so  tremendous 
and  brilliant  his  achievements,  that  to  contemporaries, 
and  for  some  time  after,  it  seemed  that  he  was  not  only 
the  most  commanding  figure  of  his  century,  after  Napoleon 
I,  but  the  greatest  and  the  most  successful   statesman 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE  189 

of  that  time.  His  accomplishment  had  been  vast,  and 
when  he  died  his  success  seemed  so  complete  as  to  justify 
almost  all  he  had  tried  to  do.  He  found  Prussia  the 
second  power  umon^  the  German  states,  and  the  German 
people  divided.  In  a  single  generation  he  had  made 
Prussia  the  greatest  state  on  the  Continent,  defeated  every 
one  of  her  rivals,  achieved  the  unification  of  (Germany, 
and  made  his  country  the  center  and  foundation  thereof. 
And  then  in  the  course  of  long,  crowded  years  he  had 
kept  the  new  German  Empire  safe  in  the  exalted  position 
he  had  given  her,  surrounded  by  friends,  the  head  and 
leader  of  the  strongest  alliance  in  the  world.  During  all 
tliis  time  there  had  come  to  the  German  people  such 
prosperity  and  material  success  that  they  looked  upon  the 
man  who  had  brought  it  about  as  the  father  and  founder 
of  his  country. 

And  yet  there  was  another  side  of  it  all,  which  some  Kis 
people,  though  not  many,  understood  then,  but  which 
more  would  understand  in  the  future.  The  unification 
of  Germany  had  not  been  brought  about  through  liberal 
development  and  respect  of  the  rights  of  others,  but 
partly  by  force,  and  chicane,  and  fraud,  by  contempt 
for  the  rights  of  people,  and  cynical  disregard  of  obligations 
and  honor.  All  of  this  seemed  good  to  Germans  who  saw 
it  through  the  glamor  of  success,  and  a  generation  of 
Germans  was  about  to  grow  up  which  would  admire 
above  all  things  the  force  and  lack  of  scruple  which  Bis- 
marck had  employed  and  had  taught  so  well.  The  leaders 
of  Germany  in  the  early  part  of  the  twentieth  century, 
who  had  learned  in  the  school  of  Bisnuirck  as  he  had 
learned  in  that  of  Frederick  the  Great,  would  worship 
force  and  strength,  just  as  he  had  once  discarded  all 
policy  but  the  rule  of  "blood  and  iron";  and  as  he  had 
altered  the  Ems  dispatch,  so  would  they  tear  up  the 
treaty  guaranteeing  Belgian  neutrality  as  a  mere  worthless 
"scrap  of  paper."     This  would  array  the  world  against 


methods 


190 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


His  failure 


French 
hatred 


them,  and  the  Empire,  overwhehned  in  defeat,  would  at 
last  lie  prostrate  and  dismembered. 

Moreover,  since  his  work  had  been  effected  and  main- 
tained by  military  power,  in  another  generation  all  the  great 
states  of  Europe  had  striven  to  make  themselves  strong 
military  powers  on  the  Prussian  model.  By  the  end  of 
the  nineteenth  century  Europe  was  groaning  under  almost 
intolerable  military  burdens,  and  a  few  years  after  was 
divided  into  two  great  military  camps.  Finally,  in  some 
respects  the  work  of  Bismarck  was  manifestly  a  failure. 
His  treatment  of  France  was  such  that  France  never  for- 
gave it,  and  always  thereafter  the  German  Empire  could 
count  on  French  hostility  as  a  danger  whenever  some 
other  great  danger  should  arise.  It  has  often  been  said 
that  Bismarck  was  opposed  to  taking  Alsace-Lorraine 
from  the  French,  knowing  that  such  loss  would  leave  them 
irreconcilable,  and  that  he  yielded  only  to  the  military 
advisors  who  insisted  because  of  the  strategic  strength 
which  the  provinces  would  give.  But  at  all  events,  he 
did  yield,  and  thereafter  the  Empire  was  encumbered  with 
the  mortgage  of  the  hatred  of  the  French,  who  might 
despair  of  being  able  to  take  vengeance,  but  whose  hatred 
nevertheless  lived  on.  Bismarck  does  not  seem  to  have 
looked  into  the  future,  beyond  his  own  age.  He  scarcely 
realized  the  importance  of  a  colonial  empire,  nor  did  he 
conceive  how  soon  a  great  deal  of  German  ambition  would 
lie  beyond  Europe,  on  the  oceans  and  in  continents  far 
away.  It  would  have  been  better  in  all  respects,  some 
have  thought,  had  he  not  seized  from  France  territory  in 
Europe,  but  taken  of  her  colonies  instead.  So  it  was  that 
some  years  before  the  Great  War  an  author  wrote,  with- 
out being  much  heeded,  that  it  was  still  too  soon  to  know 
whether  generally  the  chancellor's  policy  had  really  been 
successful. 

With  the  passing  of  Bismarck  began  the  second  stage 
in  the  development  of  the  new  German  nation.     Between 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


191 


1864  and  1888  the  Empire  had  been  created  and  made 
the  greatest  of  the  European  states.  From  about  1890 
on  to  1914  it  went  forward  to  greater  things;  its  leaders 
made  it  a  mighty  world  power  and  strove  at  last  to  make 
it  beyond  all  doubt  the  greatest  power  in  the  world.  The 
outlook  of  German  leaders  became  wider,  their  ambition 
vaster  and  grander;  they  played  for  great  stakes  higher 
and  more  boldly,  until  in  the  end,  as  it  seemed  to  one  of 
them,  they  sought  "World  Dominion  or  Downfall." 

In  what  followed,  at  first,  the  young  emperor  took  the 
lead.  Some  believed  that  he  was  rash  and  might  easily 
plunge  into  a  war,  for  he  spoke  with  stern  pride  of  the 
power  of  his  army.  But  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a 
century  in  his  reign  there  was  no  great  conflict  in  Europe, 
and  often  he  boasted  that  he  had  striven  to  keep  the 
peace.  Doubtless  he  did.  But  always  this  desire  for 
peace  seems  to  have  been  on  condition  that  Germany  hold 
her  superior  position  in  Europe,  and  that  her  policy  should 
not  be  thwarted.  When  there  rose  up  against  the  alliance 
headed  by  Germany  another  great  group  of  powers,  and 
it  was  no  longer  so  easy  for  Germany's  word  to  be  law 
as  it  had  been  in  Bismarck's  time,  then  German  statesmen 
and  the  emperor  strove  so  hard  to  maintain  the  German 
hegemony  that  one  great  crisis  followed  another  in  Europe 
for  the  space  of  ten  years.  At  the  end  of  that  time  the 
nations  were  plunged  into  the  greatest  of  all  their  wars. 

When  in  1890  William  II  took  control  of  the  govern- 
ment and  its  foreign  policy  there  followed  at  once  a  great 
altering  of  political  relations.  Bismarck  had  always  kept 
France  nearly  isolated  and  alone.  In  three  years  after 
this  time  she  w^as  closely  joined  in  an  understanding  with 
Russia.  He  had  tried  by  all  means  to  retain  Russia's 
friendship,  and  he  had  succeeded  nearly  all  of  the  time. 
But  Russia  was  allowed  to  draw  away  now,  and  almost 
immediately  she  sought  the  friendship  and  became  the 
ally  of  France.     Bismarck  had  desired  not  to  antagonize 


New  policy 
of  the  Ger- 
man Empire 


Results 


Changed 

European 

relations 


192 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


End  of  the 
"Reinsur- 
ance'' policy 


Closer  rela- 
tions with 
Great  Brit- 


Great  Britain,  and  during  his  time  no  dangerous  mis- 
understanding had  arisen;  but  in  less  than  ten  j^ears  Ger- 
many entered  upon  a  policy  which  profoundly  alarmed 
Great  Britain,  and  shortly  caused  her  to  take  her  place  to- 
gether with  Russia  and  France. 

The  secret  agreement  between  Russia  and  Germany 
in  1887  had  been  made  for  three  years.  Before  it  expired, 
in  1890,  the  tsar  tried  to  have  it  renewed,  but  Germany 
would  not  consent.  There  is  a  great  deal,  not  yet  known, 
relating  to  all  of  this;  but,  it  has  been  conjectured  that 
one  of  the  important  causes  of  disagreement  between 
Bismarck  and  William  II  was  concerning  relations  with 
Russia;  that  Bismarck  would  have  had  the  understanding 
renewed  and  would  have  held  Russia  fast  to  the  Empire,  but 
that  the  young  emperor  now  had  other  plans  which  ran 
counter  to  continuing  this  friendship.  It  has  been  thought 
also  that  this  was  the  time  when  the  government  of  Germany 
began  to  cherish  ambitions  in  the  Balkans  and  Turkey. 
If  this  were  the  case,  then  most  probably  it  would  soon  be 
as  impossible  for  Germany  to  remain  in  close  friendship  with 
Russia  as  for  Austria-Hungary  since  1876.  "My  foreign 
policy  remains  and  will  remain  the  same  as  it  was  in  the 
time  of  my  grandfather,"  was  the  message  William  sent 
to  the  tsar.  But  the  Russian  ambassador  believed  that 
Germany  in  the  future  would  have  greater  regard  for  the 
alliance  with  Austria-Hungary.  And  so  it  was,  for  that 
alliance  now  became  stronger  with  every  year,  until  at  last 
it  was  the  closest  in  Europe. 

It  also  seemed  to  the  Russian  ambassador,  who  wrote 
of  these  changes,  that  Germany  now  counted  on  getting 
the  friendship  of  Great  Britain  to  replace  that  of  Russia, 
and  even  that  Great  Britain  might  be  added  to  the  Triple 
Alliance.  It  might,  indeed,  have  seemed  to  him  that 
there  was  some  chance  of  bringing  this  about.  Friendly 
relations  with  England  were  a  tradition.  The  mother  of 
the  German  emperor  was  a  daughter  of  Queen  Victoria, 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE  193 

whose  husband,  Albert,  liad  been  a  German.  There  were 
many  people  in  England  at  this  time  who  learned  from  the 
school  of  Freeman  and  Carlyle  how  excellent  were  German 
things,  and  how  much  that  was  good  in  England  had  been 
inherited  from  Germany  of  old;  Lord  Salisbury,  prime 
minister  at  this  time,  believed  strongly  in  best  possible 
relations  with  the  German  Empire.  Good  relations  with 
Britain  were,  accordingly,  easy  to  maintain  and  improve 
for  the  present,  though  she  would  most  probably  not  have 
entered  into  any  alliance,  and  it  is  not  certainly  known 
that  Germany  desired  her  to  do  so. 

The  new  German  policy  attracted  less  attention  than  Relations 
might  have  seemed  possible.  The  close  relations  between  ^'^^  Turkey 
Germany  and  Russia  had  been  largely  a  secret.  The 
attention  of  men  was  still  fastened  mostly  on  the  older 
issues,  the  feeling  between  France  and  Germany,  and  the 
rivalry  between  England  and  France,  and  England  and 
Russia.  But  a  very  significant  event  occurred  the  year 
before  Bismarck  retired.  In  1889  William  II  went  to 
Constantinople  and  visited  Abdul  Hamid,  the  sultan  of 
Turkey.  As  men  afterward  saw  this  event,  it  seemed 
the  beginning  of  an  epoch  in  the  politics  of  Europe. 

In  the  Middle  Ages  the  German  people  had  fought     Ejcpansionof 

,0,  ,  1    ,    •  •  1  the  German 

agamst  the  blavs  to  the  east,  subdumg  or  pressmg  them     people  in  the 

back,  and  extending  eastward  their  German  dominion.  In  past 
this  manner  had  the  old  Prussia  been  acquired,  in  this  way 
Austria's  empire  built  up.  In  the  course  of  this  movement 
to  the  east  and  the  south  some  Germans  had  pushed 
beyond  the  mass  of  their  fellows  and  made  isolated  settle- 
ments, which  in  the  nineteenth  century  were  still  flourish- 
ing in  Hungary,  and  in  Poland,  in  the  western  and  south- 
ern parts  of  Russia,  and  even  far  off  in  the  Balkans.  For 
a  long  while  some  Germans  had  dreamed  of  a  day  when 
these  detached  groups,  and  the  aliens  surrounding,  might 
be  incorporated  in  a  greater  German  Empire.  Heinrich 
Heine  prophesied  that  Germans  would  some  day  possess 


194 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Drang  nach 
Osten 


The  German 
Empire  and 
Turkey 


lands  as  distant  as  the  Ukraine.  In  the  earHer  half  of 
the  nineteenth  century  other  Germans  advised  coloniza- 
tion in  the  valley  of  the  Danube  and  beyond,  saying  that 
here  was  the  best  of  fields  for  German  expansion.  After 
the  Franco-German  War,  colonization  of  Asia  Minor 
and  ]Mesopotamia  was  suggested  in  the  dominions  of  the 
sultan  of  Turkey.  About  1880  a  certain  one  urged  his 
fellows  not  to  emigrate  to  America,  as  they  were  doing: 
"We  must  create  a  central  Europe  by  conquering  for 
German  colonization  large  spaces  to  the  east  of  our 
frontiers." 

Now  in  the  new  generation  which  followed  that  of  Bis- 
marck such  thoughts  constantly  gained  greater  impor- 
tance, until  gradually  the  idea  of  Drang  nach  Osten,  or 
advance  by  Germans  to  the  east,  came  to  be  the  under- 
lying motive  in  German  foreign  affairs,  and  at  last  prin- 
cipal among  the  causes  leading  to  the  great  European 
War.  William  II  sought  the  friendship  of  the  sultan  of 
Turkey.  England  had  previously  been  friend  and  pro- 
tector of  the  Turks,  but  events  like  the  British  occupation 
of  Ef,ypt  had  caused  her  influence  to  wane.  In  1898, 
about  the  time  when  England  and  France  were  embroiled 
in  the  Fashoda  dispute  concerning  the  upper  Sudan,  about 
the  time  when  Germany  began  her  great  naval  expansion, 
William  went  to  Constantinople  again,  and,  going  on  to 
Jerusalem  and  Damascus,  proclaimed  himself  the  protector 
of  Turkey  and  announced  that  he  was  the  friend  of 
Mohammedans  all  over  the  world.  Year  after  year 
German  representatives  established  the  influence  of  their 
country  more  strongly.  Most  people  had  no  conception 
how  far  they  were  succeeding,  but  in  1914  it  was  suddenly 
found  that  Turkey  was  more  closely  bound  to  Germany 
and  Austria  than  was  Italy,  a  member  of  the  Triple  Alli- 
ance; that  she  was  actually  a  vassal  of  Germany,  at 
whose  behest  she  could  be  pushed  into  a  war  where  her 
very  existence  must  be  staked. 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


195 


In  controlling  Turkey  and  developing  her  resources  the 
most  important  thing  done  by  Germans  was  the  con- 
struction of  the  Bagdad  Railway.  As  early  as  1875 
German  engineers  had  l)iiilt  f(^r  the  Turkish  Government 
a  railway  across  Anatolia,  connecting  Konia  with  Skutari, 
opposite  Constantinople.  Thirteen  years  later  this  rail- 
way was  transferred  to  a  German  company.  Now  in 
1899,  the  year  following  the  emperor's  second  visit,  the 
sultan  granted  him  a  concession  to  extend  this  railroad 
across  Asiatic  Turkey  down  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  There 
was,  however,  at  the  head  of  the  Gulf,  and  controlling  the 
outlet  to  its  waters,  the  district  of  Koweit,  ruled  by  a 
sheik  who  gave  little  obedience  to  the  sultan.  With 
this  sheik  the  British  immediately  made  a  treaty,  so  as 
to  block  the  future  completion  of  the  railroad,  which  they 
conceived  might  be  dangerous  to  them.  None  the  less, 
work  was  taken  up  and  continued  at  intervals  until  just 
before  1914  the  road  which  had  been  constructed  to 
Aleppo,  with  a  branch  dowTi  along  the  eastern  Mediter- 
ranean coast,  had  also  been  taken  on  almost  completely 
through  to  Bagdad,  and  the  control  and  development  of 
Asiatic  Turkey  had  been  put  into  the  hands  of  the  Ger- 
mans. 

It  was  not  possible  to  exaggerate  the  importance  of  this 
undertaking.  If  the  road  were  ever  completed  Germany, 
provided  she  had  also  secured  control  of  the  intervening 
territory  in  Europe,  would  be  mistress,  perhaps,  of  the 
most  important  line  of  communication  in  the  world.  It 
was  in  Europe  and  in  Asia  that  most  of  the  world's 
inhabitants  lived.  Communication  between  them  had 
till  then  been  mostly  by  water.  Of  water  routes 
there  were  two:  one  long  and  one  short.  The  long  one 
ran  down  to  the  south  of  Africa  then  uj)  toward  India 
and  China;  for  a  great  while  it  had  been  dominated  by 
the  British,  who  held  India  and  South  Africa,  and  numer- 
ous stations  on  the  way.     The  better  and  the  shorter  was 


The  Bagdad 
Railway 


Mittel- 
europa  and 
iheBagh- 
dadbahn 


196 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


strategic 
con- 
sequences 


Changing 
relations  in 
Europe 


through  the  Mediterranean  Sea;  and  this  also  was  even 
more  securely  in  the  hands  of  the  British,  who  held  Gibral- 

Itar  at  one  end  of  the  sea  and  the  Suez  Canal  at  the  other. 

'  But,  after  all,  communication  by  these  routes  was  round- 
about and  slow.  The  end  of  the  nineteenth  century  was 
an  era  of  railroad  development,  which  furnished  trans- 
portation swifter  and  easier  than  any  by  water.  If  only 
the  Germans  could  secure  railroad  lines  leading  down 
from  their  o^mi  northern  ports  across  Austria-Hungary 
and  the  Balkans  to  Constantinople,  and  then  connect  with 
the  Bagdad  Railway  having  a  terminus  on  the  Persian 
Gulf,  Germany  would  control  the  shortest  and  the  best 
route  between  Europe  and  Asia,  and  might  in  time  domi- 
nate a  great  part  of  all  the  world's  trade. 

Even  more  important  to  a  military  power  were  the 
strategic  advantages  involved.  Not  only  would  the  Ger- 
mans and  their  friends,  lying  between  their  possible 
enemies,  separate  them  and  have  them  at  disadvantage, 
but  they  would  have  incomparably  the  best  line  of  interior 
communications  for  moving  troops  swiftly,  a  route, 
moreover,  lying  right  across  the  most  important  part  of 
the  world,  and  perhaps  capable  of  being  rendered  in- 
vulnerable to  attacks  by  sea  power.  Furthermore,  as 
some  Germans  boasted,  one  part  of  this  railway  system 
would  lead  close  to  Egypt,  and  always  be  a  threat  to 
the  British  there,  while  on  the  Persian  Gulf  they  could 
at  any  time  put  masses  of  troops  to  strike  over  at  India 
far  more  quickly  than  the  British  could  bring  reinforce- 
ments. In  short,  they  would  have  in  this  railway  system 
an  instrument  for  making  Germany  the  greatest  power 
in  the  world. 

This  new  policy  about  the  Bagdad  Railway,  the  Bal- 
kans, and  a  central  Europe  under  the  influence  of  Germany 
developed  gradually  in  the  period  after  1888,  but  it  became 
ever  more  prominent  and  important  during  the  years 
just  before  the  war.     Long  before  that  time  the  politics 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


197 


of  continental  Eiiropo  liad  boon  altered  eomplctely. 
Russia,  first  dropped  from  close  friendship  hj'  Germany, 
then  antagonized  by  German  policy  in  Turkey  and  in  the 
Balkans,  had  entered  into  the  Dual  Entente  or  "Alliance" 
with  France,  opposing  not  only  Austria-Hungary  but 
Germany  as  well.  And  gradually  the  Triple  Alliance 
changed.  Italy,  as  time  went  on,  had  less  interest  in  her 
connection  with  the  Central  Powers,  and  the  old  causes  of 
antagonism  with  France  slowly  passed  almost  entirely. 
It  was  often  believed  after  1902  that  Italy  no  longer  had 
great  interest  in  continuing  in  the  Alliance,  especially  as 
her  policy  conflicted  more  with  that  of  Austria-Hungary 
in  the  Adriatic  and  the  western  Balkans,  and  that  she  re- 
mained a  member  more  through  fear  of  withdrawing  than 
because  she  desired  to  continue.  The  Triple  Alliance 
continued  to  be  renewed,  but  so  far  as  Italy  was  concerned 
evidently  no  strong  tie  now  remained.  Very  different  was 
it  with  Austria-Hungary.  When  the  alliance  with  Ger- 
many was  made  in  1879  Bismarck  believed  that  the  con- 
nection might  not  endure.  Nevertheless,  during  his  time 
it  grew  stronger;  and  now,  with  the  development  of  the  new 
German  policy,  connection  with  Austria-Hungary  became 
firmer  each  year,  since  that  connection  was  indispensable 
to  the  success  of  Germany's  schemes.  The  empire 
planned  in  Middle  Europe  and  nearer  Asia  had  at  one  of 
its  ends  Asiatic  Turkey  and  at  the  other  the  great  German 
state.  The  scheme  could  never  be  fulfilled  unless  Austria- 
Hungary  and  the  Balkans,  which  lay  in  between,  were 
kept  in  close  alliance  or  controlled.  Therefore,  firm  alli- 
ance with  the  Dual  ]Monarchy  came  to  be  the  very  corner- 
stone of  German  foreign  policy;  and  it  was  more  and  more 
evident  that  Germany  would  give  Austria-Hungary  sup- 
port, and  that  for  the  sake  of  her  own  greatness  and  ambi- 
tions she  never  could  fail  to  do  so.  And  the  attachment 
of  Austria-Hungary  to  the  German  Empire  became  equally 
strong.     Not  only  did  the  Dual  Monarchy  require  the 


The  oppos- 
ing alliances 


Strength- 
ening of  the 
alliance  be- 
tween the 
German  Em- 
pire and 
Austria- 
Hungary 


198 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Rivalry  with 
Great  Brit- 


Previous 
relations  be- 
tween Ger- 
many and 
England 


support  of  its  powerful  neighbor  against  such  a  great  rival 
as  Russia,  but  the  ambitions  of  Austria-Hungary  coincided 
largely  with  German  plans.  If  Germans  hoped  to  control 
a  great  railroad  down  through  the  Balkans  and  across 
Turkey  to  the  Persian  Gulf,  so  did  Austria-Hungary 
desire  to  be  the  greatest  power  in  the  western  Balkans, 
rule  all  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic  Sea,  and  extend 
dovm  to  the  Mediterranean  at  Salonica. 

During  these  same  years  further  change  in  interna- 
tional affairs  brought  another  vast  alteration.  So  im- 
mense was  the  development  of  the  German  Empire,  so 
colossal  its  strength  as  it  grew,  that  German  ambitions 
developed  in  every  direction — not  only  in  eastern  and 
central  Europe,  in  sharper  rivalry  with  Russia,  but  also 
on  the  seas  and  in  distant  places,  which  brought  Germany 
at  last  into  direct  competition  with  England.  As  this 
came  about,  it  was  very  evident  that  a  second  of  Bis- 
marck's axioms  had  been  discarded.  He  had  always 
striven  to  keep  Russia  as  a  friend  and  avoid  any  estrange- 
ment with  Britain.  The  Germany  of  William  II  hesitated 
not  to  challenge  and  contend  with  them  both. 

Previously  relations  between  Germany  and  England 
had  been  very  good.  Between  Englishmen  and  Germans 
there  had  long  been  friendship  with  little  memory  of  old 
wrong  or  warfare,  and  there  was  always  a  certain  feeling  of 
kinship  because  of  blood  and  common  inheritance  and 
speech.  Spain,  France,  Russia  had  been  the  rivals  of 
England,  not  the  Germans.  Englishmen  had  viewed  the 
establishment  of  German  unity  with  a  great  deal  of 
sympathy  and  admiration.  Some  did  question  the 
methods  by  which  this  had  been  brought  about,  but  actu- 
ally for  a  time  after  1871  the  interests  of  Britam  and 
the  German  Empire  did  not  conflict  and  there  was  no 
direct  cause  for  any  hostile  feeling.  Great  Britain  was  a 
sea  power  and  her  chief  interests  were  outside  of  Europe. 
Germany  was  not  a  naval  power  during  Bismarck's  time 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


199 


and  her  interest  was  altof^ether  in  keepin*/  tliat  whic-li  slie 
had  just  achieved,  first  place  in  continental  afi'airs.  Pres- 
ently, it  is  true,  the  immense  maritime  and  industrial 
development  of  Germany  brou<]fht  keen  competition  and 
aroused  some  unpleasant  feeling.  But  all  this  awakened 
no  hostility  in  Britain,  and  as  time  went  on  it  was  seen 
that  England  could  well  hold  her  own. 

In  the  later  years  of  his  power  Bismarck  had  seen  in- 
creasing need  of  a  strong  navy  to  guard  the  Empire's 
growing  commercial  and  colonial  interests,  but  the  great 
change  came  after  he  had  been  dismissed,  with  the  rise 
of  the  new  school  of  statesmen,  who  looked  beyond 
Europe  and  would  make  Germany  the  greatest  of  the 
great.  The  German  army*;  was  incomparably  the  strong- 
est in  the  w^orld,  but  they  were  conscious  of  a  surplus 
of  strength  in  their  country,  not  needed  for  the  army, 
and  they  began  to  cherish  the  plan  of  making  Germany 
a  great  naval  power  and  a  seeker  for  colonies  also.  It 
was  probably  foreseen  that  this  would  inevitably  bring 
very  different  relations  with  England.  Hitherto  Britain 
had  been  on  her  guard  against  France  and  Russia,  both 
of  them  strong  naval  powders  and  active  rivals  in  Africa  and 
Asia.  For  some  years  it  had  been  her  purpose  to  maintain 
the  "two-power  standard,"  to  keep  her  fleet  stronger 
than  the  two  next  greatest  navies  combined.  In  1889 
Great  Britain  had  undertaken  a  comprehensive  scheme 
of  naval  increase,  and  by  1898,  w^ien  a  crisis  developed 
with  France,  the  French  had  yielded  completely,  so  over- 
whelming was  British  strength  on  the  sea.  Britain  had 
no  large  army,  and  so  could  not  defend  herself  against 
the  great  standing  armies  of  European  states  if  ever  they 
reached  her  shores.  Her  sole  reliance  was  on  command 
of  the  sea,  and  it  was  justly  felt  that  if  this  were  lost, 
then  all  would  be  gone  and  the  British  Empire  destroyed 
beyond  hope.  The  British  people  accordingly  were 
resolved  at  all  costs  to  maintain  their  superiority  on  the 


Germany 
and  British 
sea  power 


Increase  of 
British  naval 
strength 


200 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


German 
ambitions 
on  the  sea 


The  Naval 
Laws,  1898, 
1900 


ocean,  and  would  probably  come  to  regard  with  much 
dread  any  nation  who  challenged  this  position. 

Suddenly  and  in  dramatic  way  the  German  Govern- 
ment did  do  this.     Germans  were  building  up  a  great 
commerce,  which  was  not  interfered  with  by  the  British, 
but   which   they   knew  could   be   stopped  or  destroyed, 
if  the  British  tried  to  do  it.     More  and  more  they  de- 
sired colonies  and  markets  abroad.     They  had  begun  to 
seek  colonies  too  late.     There  was  little  left  for  them  to 
take.     But  they  felt  that  they  had  better  chance  of  being 
considered   in  distant  places   if  they  had  a  strong  war 
fleet  to  establish  their  communications.     They  considered 
that  the  great  British  Empire,  as  well  as  the  new  French 
colonial    empire,    had    been    made    possible    by    naval 
power.     In  this  new  era  of  great  German  ambitions  the 
leaders  felt  that  the  German  Empire  was  incomplete  so 
long  as  it  had  no  strong  navy. 

The  lead  was  taken  by  Admiral  von  Tirpitz  and  the 
emperor  himself.  There  was  opposition  among  the  older 
school  of  thinkers  in  Germany,  but  after  much  effort  a 
bill  was  passed  by  the  Reichstag  in  1898  providing  for 
a  great  naval  increase.  The  law  provided  for  expending, 
during  a  course  of  years,  1,000,000,000  marks,  and  was  con- 
sidered to  be  the  most  ambitious  naval  programme  under- 
taken by  any  state  in  the  memory  of  man.  That  same 
year  the  Flottenverein  (Navy  League)  was  established,  to 
interest  the  people  in  naval  expansion.  It  had  600,000 
members  in  two  years,  and  shortly  after  a  million.  A 
vast  amount  of  educational  work  and  propaganda  was 
done  by  this  organization,  and  it  was  most  successful  in 
arousing  the  people.  Much  greater  development  soon 
followed.  In  1900  a  vaster  sum  was  appropriated,  and 
plans  made  for  a  navy  twice  as  powerful  as  that  provided 
two  years  before. 

Such  startling  naval  increase  affected  other  powers  at 
once  and  profoundly.     It  began  to  seem  that  Germany 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


201 


was  about  to  attempt  upon  the  water  what  she  had  once 
succeeded  in  doin^  on  the  land;  and  this  was  an  ominous 
thing  when  tlie  triumplis  of  her  armies  were  recalled.  But 
of  all  Germany's  neighbors  none  saw  herself  threatened 
so  greatly  as  England.  As  this  new  (jcrman  navy  was 
built  up  (jlreat  Britain  might  be  endangered,  perhaps,  by 
the  German  Empire  more  than  by  France.  Moreover, 
the  very  preamble  of  the  law  of  1000  seemed  directed 
against  England.  "Germany  must  have  a  battle  fleet 
so  strong  that  even  for  an  adversary  with  the  greatest  sea 
power  a  war  against  it  would  involve  such  dangers  as  to 
imperil  his  o\ati  position  in  the  world."  "The  ocean  is 
indispensable  to  the  greatness  of  Germany,"  said  the 
emperor  about  the  same  time.  "As  my  grandfather  re- 
organized the  armj',  so  I  shall  reorganize  my  navj\"  And 
in  1901:  "Our  future  lies  upon  the  water." 

There  was,  indeed,  a  great  turning-point  about  1898. 
In  that  year  occurred  the  crisis  between  Britain  and 
France,  in  which  the  French  yielded,  but  remained  filled 
with  savage  hatred  and  anger.  On  the  other  hand,  Ger- 
many was  still  well  liked  in  Great  Britain.  We  now  know 
that  for  some  years  certain  leaders  in  Germany  and  in 
Britain  had  been  striving  to  establish  an  entente.  But 
during  the  Boer  War,  which  began  in  1899,  Germans 
gave  to  the  Boers  such  sympathy  and  encouragement 
as  they  could,  and  might  perhaps  have  intervened  if 
England  had  not  controlled  the  sea.  Next  year,  when 
German  naval  plans  were  so  greatly  enlarged.  Englishmen 
began  pondering  upon  the  situation.  It  was  difficult 
for  most  of  them  to  conceive  that  Britain  could  be  in  any 
danger,  for  British  supremacy  on  the  seas  was  a  tradition, 
and  British  control  had  been  unquestioned  since  the  day 
of  Trafalgar.  None  the  less,  a  new  generation  was  coming 
into  public  life  which  saw  things  in  terms  of  altered  condi- 
tions, which  believed  that  in  the  last  generation  Germany 
had  increased  so  much  more  greatly  than  England,  and 


Apprehen- 
sion in 
England 


The  diplo- 
matic revo- 
lution, 
1904-7 


S02 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Great 
Britain  not 
safe  in 
isolation 


Growing  un- 
easiness in 
England 


The  Dread- 
naught 


that  this  greater  Germany  now  bade  fair  to  be  so  very 
powerful  on  the  sea  that  Britain  was  no  longer  safe  as 
before,  aloof  in  her  old  isolation.  They  believed  that  she 
could  no  longer  wisely  stand  alone,  and  that  she  should 
enter  into  closer  relations  with  friends  in  Europe  and 
everywhere  else  in  the  world.  Apparently  the  leader  of 
this  group  in  England  was  King  Edward  VII,  who  came  to 
the  throne  in  1901.  He  seems  to  have  understood  how 
greatly  conditions  had  changed.  At  the  same  time  he 
had  a  sincere  admiration  for  France.  Therefore,  he  took 
the  lead  in  seeking  her  friendship.  As  a  result  of  the  work 
of  some  of  the  new  leaders  in  England  and  some  of  the  new 
statesmen  in  France,  the  two  nations  soon  settled  all  their 
differences,  and  in  1904  entered  into  the  friendly  under- 
standing of  the  Entente  Cordiale.  Three  years  later,  under 
what  seemed  increasing  menace  of  German  naval  expan- 
sion, Britain  and  Russia  settled  their  differences  also.  Ac- 
cordingly, by  1907  the  new  naval  policy  of  Germany  had 
brought  England  out  of  her  long  aloofness  from  European 
affairs  into  close  and  friendly  relations  with  France  and 
cordial  relations  with  Russia. 

Each  year  the  leaders  and  statesmen  of  Britain  saw 
greater  peril  across  the  North  Sea.  Everywhere  they 
settled  all  their  outstanding  differences,  not  only  with 
France  and  with  Russia,  but  with  Italy  and  the  United 
States,  and  they  had  already  made  alliance  with  Japan. 
British  naval  forces,  once  scattered  all  over  the  world, 
were  silently  drawn  in  and  concentrated  in  the  waters 
about  Britain  and  Ireland.  But  the  uneasiness  was  felt 
rather  for  the  future  than  the  immediate  present,  since  it 
was  believed  that  England  had  such  great  superiority  on 
the  sea  that  it  would  be  a  long  while  before  Germany's 
utmost  efforts  could  really  challenge  the  British  navy. 

A  great  change  presently  occurred.  It  was  in  1904-5, 
during  the  Russo-Japanese  War,  that  modern  warships 
were  really  tested  for  the  first  time;  and  many  lessons 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


203 


were  learned  then.  After  the  great  battle  of  Tsushima 
it  was  seen,  as  some  experts  had  bef(jre  pointed  out,  that 
high  speed,  which  would  enable  a  warship  to  take  such 
position  as  it  wished,  heavy  armor,  and  great  guns  of  long 
range,  involved  immense  superiority  at  sea.  But  these 
principles  could  only  be  applied  at  their  best  on  a  ship  of 
very  great  size.  In  1907  the  British  launched  the  Dread- 
naught,  a  battleship  which  was  the  largest,  the  swiftest, 
and  most  heavily  armored  warship  that  had  ever  been 
put  afloat,  and  it  had  also  the  largest  number  of  giant 
guns  of  long  range.  This  monster,  it  was  believed,  would 
be  invulnerable  to  the  attacks  of  ordinary  warships,  able 
to  overtake  or  outrange  an  antagonist,  always  able  to 
choose  its  own  range,  and  beyond  the  enemy's  range  batter 
the  enemy  to  pieces.  The  Dreadnaught  made  the  older 
warships  antiquated.  For  a  moment  Britain  seemed  to 
have  got  great  superiority  over  all  her  rivals,  but  actu- 
ally she  had  begun  a  revolution  which  could  soon  bring 
her  temporary  disadvantage.  Great  Britain  had  the 
largest  number  of  the  older  vessels,  and  it  was  possession 
of  them  which  gave  her  such  lead  over  the  German  navy. 
Gennany,  with  her  new  naval  programme,  was  building  the 
greatest  number  of  new  ships,  and  immediately  she  altered 
the  plans  and  began  making  new  vessels  of  the  Dreadnaught 
type.  She  was  building  swiftly  and  with  such  secrecy 
that  it  was  difficult  to  know  how  swift  her  progress  was. 
It  was  evident  to  the  thinking  that  all  unexpectedly  she 
had  a  chance  to  overcome  England's  naval  preponderance 
and  threaten  her  command  of  the  seas. 

Even  though  it  was  evident  that  relations  between  the 
two  countries  were  steadily  growing  worse,  most  of  the 
English  people  could  not  quickly  understand  the  large 
changes  occurring,  or  the  altered  position  of  affairs.  But 
now  appeared  a  play,  said  to  have  been  written  at  the  wish 
of  government  officials.  An  Englishman  s  Home.  It  por- 
trayed a  nation  so  ignorant  of  its  condition  as  to  be  without 


Lessons  of 
the  Russo- 
Japanese 
War 


The  Naval 
Panic 


204 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


An  English- 
man's 
Home 


Growing 
alarm  and 
suspicion 


fear,  when  it  was  really  without  means  of  defense.  It 
told  of  England  suddenly  invaded,  and  unable  to  resist, 
of  an  Englishman  shot  for  defending  his  home.  It  had 
little  merit  as  a  play,  but  it  stirred  the  English  people  to 
their  depths,  and  aroused  them  at  last  as  the  warnings  of 
statesmen  and  writers  had  never  been  able  to  do.  There 
was  profound  alarm  and  depression,  during  what  was 
known  as  the  Naval  Panic  of  1909.  Some  Englishmen  felt 
hopeless,  some  wanted  a  great  army,  but  most  cried  for 
huge  naval  increase,  and  this  was  swiftly  undertaken. 
Eight  great  battleships  were  proposed  for  that  year,  and 
actually  construction  was  so  rapidly  advanced  that  Britain 
after  a  short  time  of  anxiety  found  herself,  not  indeed 
with  a  navy  greater  than  the  two  next  most  powerful 
navies,  but  with  a  fleet  considerably  stronger  than  the 
battle  fleet  of  the  German  Empire. 

No  longer  was  there  any  doubt  about  dangerous  rivalry 
between  the  two  powers.  Many  people  in  both  countries 
declared  that  there  was  no  reason  for  conflict,  and  sincerely 
deplored  the  growing  suspicion  and  ill  will,  but  uneasiness 
and  anger  increased.  In  both  countries  great  newspapers 
and  periodicals  did  not  cease  to  point  out  how  the  foe 
threatened  vital  interests,  and  that  preparations  must  be 
hastened  so  as  to  be  ready  for  inevitable  conflict.  In 
England  men  recalled  what  had  been  done  to  France,  and 
noted  with  alarm  the  utterances  of  German  jingoes.  In 
Germany  the  Flottenverein  taught  that  England  had  ever 
been  the  greedy  enemy  in  Germany's  way,  and  that  real 
greatness  could  come  to  the  Fatherland  only  after  a  war  of 
liberation  against  Britain.  Germans  believed  that  the 
British  would  suddenly  try  to  destroy  their  fleet.  English- 
men believed  that  Germans  might  suddenly  try  to  dash 
across  into  England,  and,  once  there,  destroy  the  founda- 
tions of  their  empire. 

Thus  the  force  of  events  ranged  Great  Britain  ever 
more  closely  with  Germany's  opponents.     It  may  be  that 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


205 


most  people  in  both  countries  abhorred  tlie  thought  of  war 
between  llie  two.  Certainly  En/^'lishnicn  felt  that  their 
preparations  were  merely  defensive.  But  the  great 
danger  in  the  situation  arose  from  the  very  fact  that 
conflict  seemed  inevitable  to  so  many.  Englishmen  often 
believed  that  the  ambitions  of  the  German  Empire  could 
only  be  fulfilled  by  sweeping  the  British  Empire  away, 
and  taking  the  best  parts  for  a  greater  Cicrmany.  ]\Iany 
Germans  were  taught  that  while  England  ruled  the  seas 
Germany  could  develop  with  difficulty  and  only  on  suf- 
ferance. Year  by  year  the  Germans  were  told  more  and 
more  that  England  had  joined  their  enemies  in  an  Einkrci- 
sung,  an  effort  to  encircle  and  crush  them.  Year  by 
year  it  came  to  be  better  understood  that  Englishmen 
must  not  make  again  the  mistake  of  1870,  not  again  allow 
France  to  be  crushed,  for  then  afterward  most  probably 
they  would  have  to  fight  alone  against  Germany  with  very 
small  chance  of  success. 

It  is  evident  that  before  1914  the  policy  of  Bismarck 
had  been  discarded,  and  that  some  of  the  things  he 
had  aphieved  had  been  completely  lost.  Some  of  Ger- 
many's old  friends  had  drawn  off  from  her,  and  joined 
France  to  make  a  great  combination,  the  Triple  Entente. 
The  alienation  of  Russia  had  been  followed  by  increasing 
distrust  on  the  part  of  Great  Britain,  and  it  was  not  im- 
probable, in  case  of  war,  that  Britain  would  be  found  with 
Germany's  foes.  Before  the  last  evil  days  there  was  some 
effort  to  clear  away  the  hostility  and  suspicion.  Germans 
often  said  they  desired  the  friendship  of  England,  and 
that  the  two  powers  working  together  could  ensure  the 
peace  of  the  world.  Many  Englishmen  wished  that  a 
friendly  understanding  could  be  reached,  and  would 
have  given  much  to  win  the  true  friendship  of  the  German 
people.  They  were  not,  however,  willing  for  their  naval 
superiority'  to  be  impaired.  A  British  leader  speaking  in 
1912  declared  that  naval  power  was  a  necessity  to  English- 


Conflict 

feared  in  the 
future 


Efforts  to 
effect  a  bet- 
ter under- 
standing 


206 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Statement  of 

"Winston 

Churchill 


Failure  of 
the  efforts 


men  but  not  to  Germans.  To  Germany  it  meant  expan- 
sion, to  England  existence.  All  the  greatness  and  power,  he 
said,  won  through  so  many  centuries  of  sacrifice  and  effort, 
could  be  swept  away  if  British  naval  supremacy  were 
impaired  for  a  moment.  In  1907,  at  the  Second  Hague 
Conference,  England  had  proposed  limitation  of  arma- 
ments, but  Germany  had  absolutely  refused  to  consider  it. 
Indeed,  Germans  boasted  that  they  could  keep  up  the 
race,  in  which  England  must  soon  fall  behind.  English 
leaders  announced  that  their  naval  construction  would  be 
regulated  by  what  Germany  did.  They  were  most  anxi- 
ous to  come  to  some  understanding  by  which  both  powers 
would  cease  the  construction  of  so  many  warships,  but  a 
decisive  supremacy  over  the  German  Empire  they  were 
firmly  resolved  to  maintain.  Germans  were  not  willing 
to  grant  a  "naval  holiday,"  but  in  1913,  at  a  time  when 
great  changes  in  the  Balkans  caused  them  to  desire  in- 
crease of  the  army  above  all  things,  there  appeared  to  be 
some  slackening  in  their  building  of  warships,  and  peaceful 
men  in  both  countries  hoped  that  better  things  would  re- 
sult. 

One  particular  effort  was  made  to  bring  about  better 
relations.  In  1912  Lord  Haldane,  lord  chancellor,  and 
one  who  loved  and  respected  the  best  of  German  things, 
went  to  Berlin  on  the  emperor's  invitation,  to  try  to  bring 
about  an  understanding.  Germany  proposed  a  treaty 
between  the  two  countries  by  which  each  would  engage 
not  to  attack  the  other.  In  event  of  either  being  involved 
in  war,  the  other  should  observe  toward  the  party  in- 
volved a  benevolent  neutrality,  though  this  agreement  was 
not  to  affect  existing  engagements.  England  refused, 
for  the  result,  it  was  thought,  would  have  been  to  permit 
Germany  to  support  her  allies  in  the  Triple  Alliance,  while 
Britain  would  have  been  debarred  from  supporting  against 
German  attack  her  friends,  with  whom  she  was  not  allied. 
The  negotiation  failed,  therefore,  but  it  seemed  to  smooth 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


207 


the  way  for  a  settlement  of  the  differences  Ix'tween  llie 
two.  Indeed,  in  the  earlier  part  of  1914  an  Anglo-German 
agreement  was  drawn  up,  by  which  all  the  principal  dif- 
ferences between  England  and  (Jcrniany,  with  respect  to 
the  Bagdad  Railway  and  Asiatic  Turkey,  were  satisfactor- 
ily arranged,  and  it  almost  seemed  that  Sir  Edward  Grey 
had  at  last  done  with  Genuany  what  he  had  accomplished 
with  France  in  1904.  This  treaty,  it  is  said,  was  to  have 
been  signed  in  the  autumn,  but  before  that  time  the  Great 
War  had  begun  and  Germany  and  the  British  Empire 
were  locked  in  a  mortal  struggle. 

This  would  seem  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  tragic 
things  in  the  recent  history  of  Europe.  The  two  great 
antagonists,  whose  enmity  and  rivalry  had  been  so  omi- 
nously growing,  appear  almost  to  have  reached  a  peace- 
able and  honorable  settlement  just  before  it  was  too  late. 
It  is  probable  that  Great  Britain  was  sincere  in  wishing  for 
peaceable  settlement  of  the  issues  between  Germany  and 
herself,  and  that  she  became  at  last  most  willing  that  the 
German  Empire  should  have  room  for  colonial  expan- 
sion. What  the  real  German  intentions  were  cannot 
yet  be  certainly  known.  Doubtless  many  Germans  sin- 
cerely desired  to  have  friendship  and  good  understanding 
with  Britain.  But  some  critics  have  seen  good  reason 
to  believe  that  Germany  entered  into  the  negotiations  of 
1912  and  1914  not  so  much  because  she  wished  lasting 
peace  with  Great  Britain,  but  because  the  military  leaders 
hoped  to  keep  Britain  inactive  until  they  had  first  dealt 
with  Russia  and  France. 


Projected 
agreement 
of  1914 


Tragic  con- 
sequences 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


General  accounts:  G.  Egelhaaf,  Geschichte  der  Neuesten  Zeit 
(4th  ed.  1912);  B.  Gebhardt,  Handbuch  der  Deutschen  Geschichte 
(2ded.  1901);  Graf  Ernst  Reventlow,  Deutschlands  Ausicdrtige 
Politik,  1S88-1913  (ed.  1918),  strongly  nationalist  and  Pan- 
German;  T.  Schiemann,  Deuischland  und  die  Grusse  Poliiik, 


208  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

aruio  1901-1914-  (1902-15);  Fiirst  Bernhard  von  Biilow,  Deutsche 
Politik  (ed.  1917),  trans,  by  Marie  A.  Lewenz,  Imperial  Germany 
(1914). 

Treaty  of  Berlin:  F.  Bamberg,  Geschichte  der  Orientalischen 
Angelegenheit  im  Zeitraume  des  Pariser  und  Berliner  Friedens 
(I89'-2);  G.  B.  Guarini,  La  Germania  e  la  Questione  d'Oriente  fino 
al  Congresso  di  Berlino,  2  vols.  (1898);  A.  Avril,  Negociations 
Relatives  au  Traite  de  Berlin,  1875-1886  (188G),  documented, 
best  account,  by  a  diplomat;  B.  Brunswick,  Le  Traite  de  Berlin, 
Annate  et  Comments    (1878). 

The  Triple  Alliance:  A.  C.  Coolidge,  The  Origins  of  the  Triple 
Alliance  (1917);  W.  Fraknoi,  Kritische  Studien  zur  Geschichte  des 
Dreihnndes  (1917);  A.  Singer,  Geschichte  des  Dreihundes  (1904); 
A.  N.  Stieglitz,  L'ltalie  et  la  Triple  Alliance  (190G);  E.  von 
Wertheimer,  Graf  Julius  Andrdssy,  3  vols.  (1910-13);  and 
above  all,  Politische  Geheimvertrdge  Oesterreich-Ungarns  von 
1879-19U,  Volume  I  (1914),  edited  by  Dr.  A.  F.  Pribram  from 
the  archives  of  Vienna,  constituting  one  of  the  most  important 
contributions  to  the  history  of  diplomacy  for  some  time,  English 
trans,  by  D.  P.  Myers  and  J.  G.  D'A.  Paul,  ed.  by  A.  C. 
Coolidge  (1920). 

Relations  with  Russia:  S.  Goriainov,  "The  End  of  the  Alli- 
ance of  the  Emperors,"  American  Historical  Review,  January, 
1918,  based  on  papers  in  the  Russian  archives  made  accessible 
by  the  Russian  Revolution,  and  explaining  certain  important 
matters  for  the  first  time. 

Policy  before  the  war:  a  good  brief  account  is  G.  W.  Prothero, 
German  Policy  Before  the  War  (1916). 

Germany  and  England:  Charles  Sarolea,  The  Anglo-German 
Problem  (1915);  B.  E.  Schmitt,  England  and  Germany,  17^0- 
1914  (1916);  Archibald  Hurd  and  Henry  Castle,  German  Sea 
Power  (1913). 

The  Bagdad  Railway:  Andre  Cheradame,  Le  Chemin  de  Fer 
de  Bagdad  (1903);  D.  Eraser,  The  Short  Cut  to  India  (1909); 
Morris  Jastrow,  The  War  and  the  Bagdad  Railway  (1917);  E. 
Lewin,  The  German  Road  to  the  East  (1916) ;  G.  Mazel,  Le  Chemin 
de  Fer  de  Bagdad  (1911) ;  Paul  Rohrbach,  Die  Bagdadbahn  (1902). 
Biographies  and  memoirs:  Margaretha  von  Poschinger, 
Kaiser  Friedrich,  3  vols.  (1898-1900),  trans.  Life  of  the  Em- 
peror Frederick  (1901);  H.  Welschinger,  VEmpereur  FrSdSric 
III,  1831-1888  (1917) ;  A.  H.  Fried,  The  German  Emperor  and  the 
Peace  of  the  World  (1912) ;  (Christian  Gauss,  editor).  The  German 


THE    TRIPLE    ALLIANCE 


209 


Emperor  as  Slwum  in  Uh  Public  Viicranra^  (lOir,);  Hermann 
Freihcrr  von  Eckhardstcin,  Lebcnscrimicrun<jen  nnd  Polth.'^che 
DenkwUrdigkeitcn,  2  vols.  (1920),  contains  some  interesting  and 
important  information  upon  attempts  to  draw  Germany  and 
England  together;  Fiirst  Chlodwig  zu  Ilohenlohe-Schillmgs- 
furst,  Denhnirdicjiceiten,  2  vols.  (ed.  1907),  trans,  by  G.  W. 
Chrystal  (190G). 


The  down- 
fall of 
France 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE   RECOVERY   OF   FRANCE— THE 
DUAL  ALLIANCE 

Frangais! 

Le  peuple  a  devance  la  Chambre,  qui  hesitait.     Pour  sauver  la  patrie 
en  danger,  il  a  demande  la  Republique. 

Proclamation  du  Gouvernement  de  la  Defense  Nationale  aux 
Frangais,  Septembre  4,  1870:  Archives  Diplomatiques,  1871— 
1872,  ii.  503. 

Si  la  France  est  attaquee  par  I'AlIemagne,  ou  par  I'ltalie  soutenue 
par  TAllemagne,  la  Russie  emploiera  toutes  ses  forces  disponibles 
pour  attaquer  I'AlIemagne. 
Si  la  Russie  est  attaquee  par  TAllemagne,  ou  par  I'Autriche  soutenue 
par  I'AlIemagne,  la  France  emploiera  toutes  ses  forces  disponibles 
pour  combattre  I'AlIemagne. 

Military  Convention,  August  1892  (Basis  of  the  Dual  Alliance): 
Documents  Diplomatiques,  U Alliance  Franco-Russe  (1918). 

If  the  rise  of  the  German  Empire  affords  the  most 
striking  example  of  the  swift  growth  of  a  European  power, 
France  after  1871  gives  the  best  instance  of  the  recovery 
of  a  people  crushed  down  by  terrible  defeat.  Before  1870 
France  was  the  leading  state  on  the  Continent.  Her 
armies  had  the  greatest  reputation,  and  were  supposed 
to  be  the  best  in  the  world.  Paris  was  the  center  of 
European  diplomacy.  Frenchmen  were  the  leaders  in 
international  affairs.  But  the  events  of  the  Franco- 
German  War  changed  all  this  at  once  and  completely. 
France  was  utterly  defeated.  The  German  Empire 
suddenly  took  first  place  in  Europe.  The  reputation  of 
French  arms  was  entirely  destroyed  for  the  time.  And 
there  were  few  who  could  really  think  that  France  would 
again  contend  successfully  with  her  powerful  and  victori- 

210 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


211 


ous  neighbor.  Berlin  now  held  tlie  j)iaee  that  Paris  long 
had  had,  and  Bismarck  directed  the  diplomacy  of  Europe. 

The  months  between  July,  1870,  and  June,  1871,  have 
been  remembered  by  the  French  as  L'Annee  Terrible,  the 
terrible  year.  In  the  course  of  that  time  France  had  been 
crushed  to  the  dust  by  the  foe,  then  torn  by  the  uprising 
of  the  Commune  in  Paris.  She  had  lost  two  important 
frontier  provinces,  with  1, GOO, 000  inhabitants.  From  the 
war  itself  she  had  suffered  casualties  of  almost  half  a  mil- 
lion. Her  war  materials  had  been  captured.  The  Ger- 
mans had  carried  destruction  and  suffering  over  a  wide 
extent  of  the  country.  And  there  had  been  an  indemnity 
of  five  milliards  of  francs  to  pay  to  the  victors,  while  the 
cost  of  the  war  had  been  ten  milliards  more.  Germans 
believed  that  France  was  so  far  crushed  that  she  could 
not  recover  or  be  dangerous  to  them  again  for  a  long  time; 
and  the  friends  of  France  could  only  look  to  the  future 
with  a  hope  which  they  could  not  yet  feel. 

Yet  France  began  to  recover  almost  at  once.  Soon 
she  had  risen  up  so  far  that  German  generals  were  filled 
with  the  uneasiness  that  always  comes  to  the  strong 
who  have  abused  their  strength,  and  Bismarck  devoted 
himself  to  keeping  France  without  friends  and  surrounding 
Germany  with  allies.  After  the  defeats  of  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries  Spain  slowly  sank  in  decadence, 
nor  did  she  ever  grow  great  again.  So  it  was  with  Sweden 
after  her  conflict  with  Russia,  and  Holland  after  strug- 
gling with  France.  Austria  never  regained  her  old 
place  after  1866,  and  it  has  often  been  so  with  others. 
Either  they  had  completely  exliausted  their  strength 
and  resources,  or  else  they  lacked  stamina  and  the 
power  of  recuperation.  But  no  nation  has  ever  had  the 
qualities  of  greatness  more  thoroughlj^  than  the  French. 
From  the  ruin  of  the  Hundred  Years'  War,  from  the 
losses  of  her  wars  of  religion,  from  the  disasters  of  the  last 
years  of  Louis  XIV,  and  from  the  complete  overthrow 


L'Annee 
Terrible 


The  in- 
herent 
greatness 
of  France 


212 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Causesofthe 

communard 

attempt 


Conditions 
in  Paris 


when  Napoleon  was  defeated  by  Europe,  always  she 
easily  recovered,  because  of  the  excellence  and  strength, 
the  vitality,  the  brave  character,  the  inexhaustible  courage 
of  French  men  and  women.  At  present,  after  the  long 
drain  and  exliaustion  of  the  Great  War,  in  which  she  bore 
the  brunt,  the  best  augury  of  the  recovery  of  France  from 
her  grievous  weakness  is  the  memory  of  what  she  did  in 
other  times.  And  for  Germany,  in  this  time  of  humilia- 
tion and  ruin,  the  example  of  France  after  1871  may  be, 
perhaps,  the  best  encouragement  that  she  can  have. 

Before  the  recovery  began,  however,  there  was  one  more 
terrible  disaster.  The  Commune  of  Paris  came  at  the  end 
of  the  war,  while  confusion  was  still  reigning  in  France. 
Paris  had  long  been  the  stronghold  of  republican,  radical, 
and  socialist  sentiment.  Many  of  the  workmen  of  the 
city  had  hearkened  to  the  preaching  of  doctrines  which 
were  not  only  opposed  to  empire  and  monarchy  but  to 
much  of  the  existing  social  system;  and  they  had  taught 
that  very  sweeping  changes  would  be  necessary  to  bring 
happiness  to  the  mass  of  the  people.  Opportunity  now 
came  for  the  application  of  some  of  these  teachings.  The 
siege  of  Paris  was  just  over,  and  Paris  had  greatly  suffered. 
In  the  general  prostration  of  business  many  of  the  work- 
ingmen  had  no  employment.  They  had  until  recently 
been  members  of  the  National  Guard  which  undertook 
the  defence  of  the  city,  but  the  Assembly  which  had  been 
elected  to  make  peace  with  the  Germans  now  dissolved  the 
Guard.  At  the  same  time  the  Assembly  decided  to  hold 
its  meetings  in  Versailles  instead  of  in  Paris.  The  people 
of  Paris  had  proclaimed  a  republic  in  1870;  but  the 
Assembly  was  monarchist  and  conservative,  and  the  lib- 
erals and  radicals  of  the  cities  distrusted  what  it  might 
do.  Moreover,  payment  of  obligations,  which  had  been 
suspended  by  a  moratorium  during  the  siege,  was  now 
ordered,  and  immense  hardship  resulted  to  a  vast  number 
of  people  who  had  no  employment  or  business  and  so 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


213 


could  not  pay  their  debts.  Hence  a  great  number  of 
poor,  hungry,  savage  people,  who  still  had  the  arms  with 
which  they  had  fought  against  the  Germans,  stood  in 
idleness,  distrusting  their  government,  and  very  ready 
to  follow  new  leaders. 

In  the  Middle  Ages,  when  nations  had  not  yet  arisen 
and  before  states  were  completely  formed,  cities,  and 
among  them  notably  Paris,  had  often  had  much  inde- 
pendence and  right  to  regulate  their  own  affairs.  In 
medieval  France,  as  elsewhere  in  western  Europe,  a  local 
jurisdiction,  whether  rural  or  urban,  with  powers  of  self- 
government  was  known  as  coimnunitas  or  commune. 
Afterward,  in  the  later  period,  in  France  commune  was 
the  name  of  one  of  the  small  administrative  districts  into 
which  the  country  was  divided.  Now  France  was  strongly 
organized  with  almost  everything  regulated  by  a  central 
government,  of  which  the  radicals  did  not  approve. 
Therefore  they  taught  that  improvement  could  come 
only  through  decentralization  of  the  power  of  the  state, 
with  the  management  of  affairs  in  the  communes.  Thus  the 
different  communes,  which  had  different  interests,  would 
be  able  to  manage  affairs  to  their  own  best  advantage,  and, 
especially,  the  cities,  more  liberal  than  the  rural  districts, 
would  be  able  to  develop  without  interference  from  a 
government  based  largely  on  the  country.  This  scheme 
was  supported  by  some  republicans  who  feared  that 
monarchy  would  be  restored  by  the  central  government, 
and  by  socialists,  who  believed  that  thus  they  could  effect 
the  reforms  which  they  sought  for.  In  Paris  the  idea  was 
taken  up  by  the  discontented.  After  some  conflict,  in 
IVlarch,  1871,  they  seized  control  of  the  commune,  and  the 
red  flag  of  the  socialists  was  adopted. 

The  men  of  this  Commune  appealed  to  the  people  of 
France  to  follow  them  in  their  revolution,  and  for  a 
moment  it  seemed  to  observers  that  France,  just  defeated 
by  the  Germans,  was  now  about  to  split  up  into  pieces. 


The  Com- 
mune of 
Paris,  1871 


The  Com- 
mune over- 
thrown 


214 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

indemnity 

paid 


Refonns: 
local  govern- 
ment and 
the  army 


But  the  revolution  in  Paris  was  not  destined  to  spread 
like  the  uprising  of  1917  in  disorganized  Russia.  The 
people  were  against  such  innovation.  As  the  French 
prisoners  were  returned  from  Germany,  the  Assembly 
made  ready  to  overthrow  the  Commune,  and  this  was  done 
after  a  second  terrible  siege  during  April  and  May,  and  a 
fearful  week  of  fighting  in  the  streets.  The  city  suffered 
far  more  from  the  bombardment  of  the  French  armies 
and  the  incendiarism  of  the  Communalists  than  it  had 
from  the  Germans,  and  the  government  showed  no  mercy 
in  the  vengeance  which  it  took.  The  radicals  and  the 
socialists  and  extremists  were  completely  put  down,  and 
again  they  nursed  in  silence  savage  hatred  against  the 
bourgeoisie  who  had  crushed  them. 

France  now  proceeded  to  the  work  of  restoration  and 
building  for  the  future.  May  10,  1871,  the  Treaty  of 
Frankfort  was  ratified  by  the  National  Assembly.  This 
Assembly,  having  chosen  Thiers  to  exercise  the  executive 
power,  was  now  carrying  on  the  government  of  the  coun- 
try. The  first  tasks  were  to  free  the  occupied  dis- 
tricts of  Germans  by  paying  the  indemnity.  The  French 
people  responded  magnificently  to  the  appeals  of  the 
government,  and  far  more  money  was  subscribed  to  the 
loans  than  was  needed.  In  the  autumn  of  1873,  six 
months  before  the  term  allowed  by  the  Treaty,  all  the 
indemnity  had  been  paid,  and  the  last  German  soldiers 
were  out  of  France.  Financiers  all  over  the  world  were 
surprised  at  the  amount  of  money  which  French  peasants 
and  workmen  had  brought  forth.  There  were  not  wanting 
Germans  who  declared  that  if  their  government  had  known 
what  France  had,  a  greater  amount  would  have  been 
taken;  and  that  if  France  were  ever  conquered  by  Ger- 
many again,  the  indemnity  would  be  vastly  greater. 

For  two  years,  until  May  24,  1873,  Thiers  and  the 
Assembly  governed  France.  During  his  time  two  im- 
portant reforms  were  made.     In  1871  the  excessive  cen- 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE  215 

tralization  of  the  government,  which  had  prevailed  since 
Napoleon  I,  was  partly  undone  when  a  larger  amount  of 
local  government  was  established.  Local  voters  were  to 
elect  the  council  of  the  commune,  and  in  the  smaller 
communes  the  mayor  was  to  be  chosen  by  the  council.  The 
central  government  was  to  appoint  the  mayors  only  in 
the  principal  towns.  In  1872  the  army  system  was  re- 
organized, by  a  law  which,  in  effect,  introduced  the  mili- 
tary system  which  had  given  so  much  success  to  Prussia. 

As  the  work  of  reconstruction  proceeded,  the  most  im-  A  republic 
portant  problem  was  to  settle  the  form  of  the  govern-  proclaimed 
ment.  Thiers  had  been  appointed  by  the  Assembly. 
The  Assembly  had  been  elected  for  the  purpose  of  making 
peace;  but  neither  the  term  of  its  power  nor  the  extent  of 
its  powers  had  been  defined.  The  Assembly  did  not 
dissolve  itself,  however,  and  in  the  existing  state  of  things 
there  was  no  power  able  to  dismiss  it.  In  September,  1870, 
the  revolutionists  in  Paris,  who  overthrew  the  imperial 
government,  had  proclaimed  a  republic.  This  Republic 
had  been  promptly  acknowledged  by  the  United  States, 
and,  after  a  little  delay,  by  the  principal  governments  of 
Europe.  But  such  a  government  had  not  been  constituted 
by  the  people,  and  it  was  soon  evident  that  the  representa- 
tives whom  they  had  elected  to  the  National  Assembly 
were  not  for  the  most  part  in  favor  of  a  republic  in  France. 
In  August,  1871,  however,  the  Assembly  accepted  for  the 
time  being  the  government  existing,  and  gave  to  the 
executive  the  title  of  "President  of  the  French  Republic." 
The  Rivet  Law  by  which  this  was  done  asserted  also  that 
the  Assembly  had  constituent  powers.  Accordingly, 
the  Assembly  undertook  to  decide  what  form  of  govern- 
ment should  be  permanently  established. 

Most  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly-  wished  a  res-     xhe  Re- 
toration  of  the  monarchy.     Some  hoped  for  a  Bonapartist     public 
empire  again.     Thiers  himself  had  been  made  executive     established 
and  president  because  he  favored  having  a  king.     But  as 


tlGl' 


,SH      CH^^'' 


Channel 
Islands  — 


snNE    ^' 

INFKRIEURE' 


L.,  CALAIS  ,f  A-'.,  r  y' 


o,;calvadosi,eure''-^ 
W    I        ORNE    'i 


CURE.  —     (AISNEf      %  >vi>rV-Vs'aTeB\io 

■  ^5^''^^7J,t^^>/    MARNE    '7meuse;  '--,    '^^i-'-^,''^/ 
!  '.^,^p^>  SEINE  i  ',      V  /^..,™;.T.v.  ^    '■  ■■'?  / 


BA  Y     OF 


BISCA Y 


.r^*--/;CTLOIRE>-nJDREETy'T'  \NIEVtEX -^ "  <>W       <      "^      /-"j,^ 

*■    XVEND^E^.S     5         ViNDREf'        A/%^--     ?a6ne  'CjubaV^^WIT-Z. 
"f,'%-  ,'VIENNE->         , L-"' ALLIER  *X       '--     r-\-  I'/^Wrc' > 

W\     ''-     1i>J   -X       '^rRriusp''^^  ^A     I  T'*7>  '     AIN    */^hauteV> 

r\J_      fr~i-- .-- <--*^^\  -CREUSh,        ---iL.  \    (  i.^',  'I     SAVOIEi'i,' 

/  W-,,^',  JCORREZE,-^ -^^A  — -TN;,n'V    ISERE    i    » '--iiO    ' 

'■iD0RD0GNEV-^;'C'4^?t#).If''f/-Vf  )    m'\       ,.j''4'^y 


V^ 


L       ^1,  LOT  ET  1  I  ('""""'  ;^^    ,„!«;  .    '■•-] 

^/r'GARbiHNEi   x-;^'''-,AyEYRONV.  _<-/.■  H    "'      \'^    "^-^ 

LANDES^^^'-'-^^^^J^^"'  'X        '  ^GAP-     i^^    ' 

'}       TFRc;  VV^^l  TARN  '-..-M^    '"'^ 

%,°o  BASSES      '7  *' r'-^''H''^'^^j--'^L^ 

^' ltr^^™^^,-L^^yz^^S^i''''~\    AUDE  ,  r ^ 


■'BASSES  \ 
ALPES 


SPAIN 


Gu}f  of 
Lions 


NOTE  According  to  Treaty  of  Versailles.  June  1919,  the  Sarre  Basin  becomes 
International  territory  for  a  period  of  15  Yeats,    Coal  Mines  in  ttiis  territory^ 
are  ceded  to  France.  Plebiscite  will  determine  Sovereignty. 


Scale  of  Miles 


9.    FRANCE  IN  1920 


216 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


217 


the  months  passed  Thiers  concluded  tliat  the  best  inter- 
ests of  France  required  tlie  esta))lishment  of  a  republic, 
and  so  the  majority  in  the  Assembly  displaced  him,  choos- 
ing? now  Marshal  MacMahon  as  president,  since  they  be- 
lieved that  he  would  willini^h'  resign  as  soon  as  monarchy 
could  be  reestablished.  And  perhaps  it  might  have  been 
restored  now,  except  that  the  monarchists  were  divided 
in  two  parties,  the  Legitimists  and  those  who  supported 
the  House  of  Orleans,  It  was  hoped  that  these  two 
branches  of  the  Bourbon  family  could  unite,  but  it  proved 
impossible  to  bring  this  about.  Thus  time  drifted  on, 
with  no  permanent  government  established,  and  the  people 
showing  more  and  more  that  they  wished  a  republic. 
After  a  while  those  who  desired  a  monarchy,  but  be- 
lieved it  unwise  to  insist  on  their  wishes,  combined  with 
those  who  wanted  a  republic,  and  agreed  upon  a  conserva- 
tive arrangement.  In  1875  a  series  of  "organic  laws" 
in  effect  constituted  a  republican  government,  and  are 
often  referred  to  as  the  Constitution  of  1875.  A  republic 
was  not  formally  set  up.  It  was,  indeed,  merely  recognized 
in  the  phrase  "President  of  the  Republic,"  in  a  proviso 
which  could  only  be  carried  by  one  vote  in  a  chamber  of 
705.  The  French  Republic  has  endured  now  consider- 
ably longer  than  any  government  in  France  since  1789,  but 
it  was  established  unwillingly  and  with  great  hesitation, 
and  never  formally  proclaimed. 

The  government  of  the  French  Republic  was  based 
on  models  which  the  English-speaking  people  had  worked 
out  in  the  experience  of  a  long  time.  In  some  respects 
it  resembles  the  American  form,  but  substantially  the 
British  system  was  followed.  The  executive  power  is 
apparently  vested  in  a  president,  who  is  elected  for 
seven  years  by  the  two  chambers  of  the  legislative  bodj^ 
meeting  together  as  a  National  Assembly.  An  outsider 
might  think  that  he  really  is  head  of  the  army  and  navy 
and  that  he  really  administers  the  laws  and  appoints  the 


The  mon- 
archists fail 
to  combine 


Govern- 
ment: the 
president 


218 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

legislative 

body 


The  French 
system 


officials.  But  the  power  which  seems  to  be  in  his  hands 
is  not  real  like  that  of  the  president  of  the  United  States 
nor  that  which  was  held  by  the  German  Kaiser.  His 
position  is  rather  like  that  of  the  king  of  England,  except 
that  he  has  more  power.  Actually,  as  in  England,  the 
executive  and  administrative  powers  are  in  the  hands  of 
the  ministry.  As  in  Great  Britain,  also,  the  ministry  is 
entirely  dependent  upon  a  majority  in  the  Chambers,  the 
legislative  body.  It  is  in  the  legislative  body,  then,  that 
power  actually  lies. 

The  legislative  is  composed  of  two  houses,  a  Senate  and 
a  Chamber  of  Deputies.  The  Senate  consists  of  300  mem- 
bers elected  indirectly  by  electoral  colleges  for  a  term  of 
nine  years,  one  third  to  be  renewed  every  three  years. 
By  the  Constitution  of  1875  some  of  the  members  were  to  be 
elected  for  life,  but  this  was  done  away  with  in  1884.  The 
more  important  house,  however,  is  the  Chamber  of 
Deputies,  whose  members  are  elected  by  manhood  suf- 
frage for  a  term  of  four  years.  The  ministry  is  responsible 
to  this  parliament,  and  practically  to  the  lower  branch, 
the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  which  is  all-powerful  in  the 
making  of  laws  and  passing  appropriations.  Actually,  the 
ministry  is  a  committee  of  the  Chamber,  as  the  cabinet 
in  Britain  is  of  the  House  of  Commons. 

This  system  of  government,  which  makes  France  a 
parliamentary  republic,  differs  in  one  very  important 
respect  from  what  is  substantially  the  British  system  and 
from  what  really  prevails  in  the  United  States.  In  both 
these  countries,  while  there  may  be  several  political  par- 
ties, there  have  usually  been  two  important  parties,  op- 
posing each  other,  and  contending  in  elections  for  control 
of  the  government,  the  result  of  such  elections  giving 
the  control  to  one  or  the  other,  the  second  party  being 
then  the  opposition.  This  system  tends  to  make  political 
stability  in  Great  Britain,  since  the  ministry,  usually 
resting  on  the  solid  support  of  one  of  the  great  parties. 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


219 


remains  in  power  until  tlie  opposition  gets  a  majV)rity  for 
itself.  But  in  France,  as  in  most  continental  countries, 
the  two-party  system  does  not  prevail.  Rather,  there  are 
many  parties,  often  differing  from  each  other  only  a  little, 
and  representing  various  political  affiliations.  No  one  of 
them  is  large  enough  to  control  a  majority  of  the  votes 
in  the  legislative  assembly,  and  support  for  a  ministry  can 
be  obtained  only  by  effecting  a  combination,  or  as  it  is 
called  in  France,  a  6/oc,  of  those  parties  which  are  willing 
to  make  common  cause.  But  this  brings  instability  and 
shortness  of  tenure,  since  the  fall  of  a  ministry  can  easily 
be  brought  about  by  some  of  the  parties  withdrawing  from 
the  bloc  to  enter  into  new  combinations.  Therefore 
ministries  in  France,  as  in  Italy,  often  change  with  be- 
wildering rapidity,  causing  outsiders  uninformed  to  be- 
lieve that  the  French  are  fickle  in  politics  and  not  yet 
trained  in  governing  themselves.  Such  is  not  the  case; 
a  different  system  is  producing  results  different  from  those 
obtained  in  English-speaking  countries.  Foreign  critics 
declare  that  such  insecurity  of  ministries  tends  to  weaken 
administration  and  hamper  France  in  her  dealings  with 
other  comitries.  Frenchmen,  admitting  this,  assert  that 
their  system  nevertheless  represents,  more  delicately  than 
does  the  British,  different  shades  of  political  thought. 

The  administration  of  the  central  government  in  France 
has  all  too  frequently  been  debased  by  corruption,  jobbery, 
scandal,  and  intrigue.  Nevertheless,  generally  speaking, 
since  the  establishment  of  the  Republic  in  1875,  French- 
men have  gone  steadily  forward  on  the  w^ay  of  learning 
real  self-government.  Of  all  tasks  that  is  one  of  the 
hardest.  The  English  people  developed  it  slowly  and 
painfully  during  a  long  course  of  time.  The  French 
tried  to  establish  it  suddenly  in  1791.  In  a  few  years  it 
was  evident  that  they  had  failed,  and  most  Frenchmen 
were  willing  to  have  Napoleon  give  them  strong  govern- 
ment even  though  it  was  despotic.     Again  in  1848  a  re- 


The  Bloc 


Develop- 
ment of 
self-govern- 
ment in 
France 


220 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Government 
and  people 


Local  gov- 
ernment 
in  France 


public  was  established,  but  this  again  was  easily  and 
quickly  overthrown.  When  a  third  republic  was  pro- 
claimed in  1870,  it  might  seem  that  it  also  had  little  chance 
to  survive;  many  were  opposed  to  it,  and  many  believed  it 
must  soon  disappear.  The  French  people,  however,  were 
learning  more  about  self-government  and  republican  in- 
stitutions as  time  went  on,  and  the  Third  Republic  be- 
lying the  prophecies  of  many  of  its  enemies  and  some  of  its 
friends,  and  acquiring  stability  year  after  year,  was  by 
1920  so  thoroughly  established  that  its  overthrow  seemed 
outside  of  proper  calculations.  There  can  be  little  doubt 
that  this  was  partly  because  the  people  of  France  got 
more  and  more  acquaintance  with  self-government  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

It  is  not  sufficient  that  a  constitution  be  written  and 
adopted  providing  that  the  people  have  certain  institu- 
tions. Such  constitutions  in  Portugal  and  in  Spain  and  in 
some  of  the  South  American  countries  result  in  little  more 
than  that  the  elections  are  controlled  by  the  army  and  the 
government  by  a  few  politicians.  In  spite  of  many  ex- 
cellent provisions,  these  constitutions  fail  because  the 
people  have  little  education,  little  interest  in  political  af- 
fairs, and  almost  no  training  in  them.  Great  Britain 
has  no  written  constitution  in  any  single  dociunent,  and 
yet  her  government  continues  stable  and  firm,  and  at 
the  same  time  flexible  and  increasingly  democratic;  for  it 
rests  now  on  the  support  of  a  vast  number  of  men  and 
women  who  have  considerable  acquaintance  with  the 
management  of  their  government,  and  who  have  in- 
herited this  knowledge  from  ancestors  who  before  them 
had  interest  in  the  government  of  the  realm. 

Participation  by  the  ordinary  man  or  woman  in  govern- 
ing can  usually  not  be  in  the  affairs  of  the  central  organiza- 
tion but  in  the  smaller  and  humbler  things  of  the  local 
district.  The  continued  success  of  self-government  among 
the  people  of  England  is  in  great  measure  due  to  the  train- 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


221 


ing  which  Engh'sli  people  long  had  in  the  affiiirs  of  county 
and  parish,  to  the  vigorous  local  self-government  which 
has  existed  for  generations  in  England.  In  France  this 
had  once  existed  also,  but  it  withered  away  and  disap- 
peared when  the  strongly  centralized  monarchy  of  tlu^ 
Old  Regime  was  made  by  the  kings.  ]\Iatters,  which  in 
England  would  have  been  attended  to  by  the  leading  men 
of  the  parish  or  the  county,  were  in  France  directed  from 
Paris  or  managed  by  officials  sent  out  from  the  central 
government.  This  tended  to  produce,  as  it  alwaj's  does 
for  a  while,  a  very  efficient  government  machine;  but  in 
course  of  time  the  people  in  the  localities,  having  very 
little  to  do  in  managing  their  affairs,  to  a  gTcat  extent  lost 
their  capacity  for  self-government.  Therefore,  the  first 
two  French  republics  were  made  at  the  top  rather  than  the 
bottom,  and  soon  fell  for  lack  of  strong  foundation  in  the 
political  experience  of  the  people  themselves.  This  was, 
perhaps,  apparent  to  the  republican  leaders  as  time  went 
on.  By  the  Constitution  of  1875  a  greater  measure  of 
local  government  was  provided  for.  This  was  extended 
in  1882,  when  the  elected  councils  of  municipalities  were 
permitted  to  elect  the  mayors,  and  in  1884  when  localities 
were  given  still  larger  powers  of  self-government.  Since 
then  French  people  have  been  slowly  learning  to  some  ex- 
tent the  art  of  governing  themselves,  in  the  only  places 
in  which  it  can  be  well  learned,  where  they  live  and  carry 
on  their  own  affairs.  As  they  really  learned  to  manage 
the  little  things  themselves,  they  became  able  to  manage 
the  greater  affairs,  and  the  foundations  of  the  Republic 
became  constantly  stronger  in  the  hearts  and  intelligence 
of  the  people. 

However  admirable  the  local  government  of  England 
may  have  been  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies, it  was  for  the  most  part  in  the  hands  of  the  upper 
classes,  and  the  extension  of  self-government  and  demo- 
cratic control  of  affairs  in  Britain  came  only  slowly  in  the 


Formerly 
directed 
from  Paris 


Education 
improved 
and  ex- 
tended 


222 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Education 
necessary 
for  the  suc- 
cess of  self- 
government 


Higher 
education 


nineteenth  century.  It  was  accompanied  by  considerable 
improvement  in  the  education  of  the  mass  of  the  people. 
Self-government  may  be  extended  to  the  people  of  a 
country,  but  if  they  are  ignorant  and  illiterate  there  can 
be  little  hope  that  they  will  wisely  use  or  really  keep 
the  powers  entrusted  to  them.  This  was  well  understood 
by  the  republican  leaders  in  France,  and  they  set  about 
extending  and  improving  education.  If  there  was  to  be 
universal  suffrage  for  men,  there  must  be  general  education 
of  the  children.  In  1881  a  law  was  passed  to  make  pri- 
mary education  free  of  cost  to  parents  and  the  next  year 
it  was  made  compulsory  for  children  from  six  to  thirteen. 
Previous  to  this  time  a  quarter  of  the  men  and  more  than 
a  third  of  the  women  of  the  country  were  illiterate,  and 
education  was  to  a  considerable  extent,  as  it  had  long  been, 
in  the  hands  of  religious  orders  and  teachers.  Gradually 
education  was  extended  until  very  few  men  and  women 
were  unable  to  read  and  write,  though  the  percentage  of 
illiteracy  was  never  reduced  so  low  as  in  Germany,  which 
had  long  led  the  world  in  the  thoroughness  and  extent 
of  its  educational  work,  though  not,  perhaps,  in  the  final 
excellence  of  its  character.  Gradually,  also,  in  France 
education  was  made  entirely  secular,  and  withdrawn  com- 
pletely from  religious  teachers. 

Along  with  this,  moreover,  went  a  splendid  development 
of  higher  education,  in  upper  schools  and  universities. 
Technical  and  industrial  teaching  was  not  neglected, 
though  it  never  attained  the  prominence  or  the  reputa- 
tion abroad  that  the  German  system  got.  Foreigners 
who  went  to  Europe  for  their  education  went  almost  al- 
ways to  the  German  Empire  rather  than  to  England  or 
France;  and  this  was  especially  true  of  students  from  the 
United  States,  who  went  to  Germany  and  then  developed  in 
America  the  German  system  of  higher  education.  This  was 
due  not  only  to  the  merits  of  German  universities  but  also 
to  the  prestige  which  Germany  enjoyed  as  the  result  of  her 


THE   DUAL   ALLIANCE 


223 


successful  wars  and  her  miglity  development,  though  it 
also  seems  to  have  resulted  in  no  small  part  from  advertis- 
ing and  clever  propaganda.  But  critics  realized  more 
clearly  after  a  time  that  the  English  system  and  especially 
the  French,  if  they  produced  less  visible  efficiency  and 
erudition,  yet  trained  the  character  and  cultivated  spirit 
and  taste,  and  fineness  of  soul  and  good  judgment,  as  the 
more  mechanically  regulated,  state-supervised  system  of 
Germany  never  could  do. 

So  the  work  of  restoration  and  establishing  solidly  the 
foundation  of  the  Republic  went  steadily  forward.  Bis- 
marck, it  is  said,  favored  a  republic  in  France  because 
he  believed  such  a  government  would  be  unstable  and  make 
her  weak,  and  because  it  would  also  keep  her  isolated  and 
without  friends,  since  France  a  republic  would  be  alone 
among  the  monarchies  and  empires  of  Europe.  For  a 
long  time  she  was  without  allies,  but  the  Republic  held 
its  own  steadily,  and  while  it  was  disliked  by  a  considerable 
and  powerful  portion  of  the  population  who  were  anxi- 
ously awaiting  its  overthrow,  it  was  able  to  weather  each 
crisis  that  developed.  Business  became  settled;  the  gov- 
ernment undertook  great  and  expensive  schemes  of  ma- 
terial development,  improving  railroads  and  canals;  and 
presently  the  French  people  found  themselves  in  the 
midst  of  the  greatest  prosperity  which  had  come  to  them 
in  the  nineteenth  century.  Taxes  were  high  and  there 
was  a  huge  national  debt,  but  this  debt  was  held  almost 
entirely  in  France,  and  interest  payments  on  it,  derived 
from  taxes  taken  from  the  people,  went  back  to  them 
again. 

But  however  fair  the  picture  may  seem  now,  there  was 
much  trouble  during  the  time  when  the  improvement 
was  gradually  taking  place.  Many  times  it  seemed  to  out- 
siders that  French  temperament  was  such,  and  so  great 
were  the  difficulties  confronting  the  French  leaders,  that  the 
Republic  would  endure  little  longer.     There  was  constant 


Recovery 
and  ma- 
terial prog- 
ress 


Dangers 
besetting 
the  Republic 


224 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Restoration 
of  monarchy 
desired 


The 

Boulanger 
Crisis 


though  diminishing  danger  in  the  relations  with  Germany, 
and  there  were  internal  problems  of  the  greatest  difficulty 
resulting  from  the  opposition  of  the  monarchists  and 
clericals,  and  the  relations  between  Church  and  State. 

The  English,  who  in  government  matters  are  conserva- 
tive but  at  the  same  time  bold,  have  made  great  construc- 
tive constitutional  changes,  slowly,  without  violent  break. 
In  course  of  time  they  have  altered  their  monarchy  so  far 
that  of  the  kingship  nothing  remains  but  the  name  of  king, 
and  actually  their  government  is  far  more  democratic 
than  the  governance  of  most  republics.  They  have  clung 
to  king  and  some  monarchical  forms,  however,  because  of 
attachment  to  the  past,  and  probably  for  some  time  to 
come  they  will  not  part  with  scepter  and  crown.  The 
French,  who  are  more  logical  and  direct  in  processes  of 
thought,  did  away  with  monarchy  more  abruptly,  though 
in  their  case  also  the  alteration  could  not  be  achieved  at 
once,  and  restorations,  of  king  or  emperor,  followed 
the  establishment  of  two  republics.  There  was  a  con- 
siderable and  strong  body  of  people  in  the  country,  the 
more  conservative  ones  and  those  who  loved  to  venerate 
the  past,  who  preferred  monarchy  to  a  republic,  who  dis- 
trusted government  by  the  people,  and  who  did  not  believe 
that  France  could  be  strong  and  respected  until  she  had  re- 
ceived a  king  once  more.  After  1871  these  men  and 
women  looked  confidently  for  the  fall  of  the  Republic 
through  incapacity  and  weakness;  and  when  the  course 
of  time  disappointed  them,  they  plotted  and  hoped  for  an 
opportunity  to  bring  this  about.  Generally  they  were 
supported  by  the  clericals,  whose  policy  also  they  ap- 
proved. 

When  the  hazards  of  the  first  few  years  after  1871  had 
successfully  been  passed,  the  most  dangerous  crisis  came 
in  1888,  in  the  affair  of  General  Boulanger.  The  general 
was  a  handsome,  striking  figure  whose  very  appearance 
excited  the  admiration  and  attachment  of  the  unthinking. 


' 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE  225 

He  made  himself  popular  anion^-  the  soldiers  by  some  of  A  coup 
his  measures  wliile  lie  was  uiinister  of  war.  Great  en-  ^'^^^^  ap- 
thusiasm  was  worked  up  for  him.  He  took  advantage  ^^^ 
of  some  scandals  of  the  time,  and  of  certain  grievances 
which  always  <>xist,  and  j)rescntly  let  it  he  known  that  the 
government  needed  reforming.  It  was  also  told  among 
his  friends  that  if  he  were  at  the  head  of  affairs,  France 
might  get  revenge  on  the  Germans.  He  soon  had  sup- 
porting him,  hesidevs  the  undiscriminating  multitude, 
monarchists,  clericals,  and  others.  Friends  of  the  Re- 
public feared  that  if  he  tried  a  couf  cVetat,  as  Louis  Napo- 
leon once  had,  he  might  indeed  be  abl<'  to  seize  p<jwer.  But 
the  government  was  firm,  and  at  the  critical  moment  he 
hesitated  to  act,  and  presently  fled  to  Belgium.  Then 
he  was  condemned  for  plotting  against  the  State.  His 
party  fell  to  pieces  almost  at  once,  and  he  died  by  his  own 
hand  in  exile.  Other  disquieting  times  followed,  but 
never  one  so  serious  again.  Once  this  storm  was  past, 
evidence  multiplied  that  the  Republic  was  solidly  estab- 
lished. Five  years  later  Russia  had  joined  France  in  a 
Dual  Alliance. 

In  189G  began  the  scandal  of  the  Dreyfus  Case,  which  The  Dreyfus 
continued  to  disrupt  French  society  and  disturb  the  gov-  ^^^^ 
ernment  for  the  next  ten  years.  Two  years  previously 
Dreyfus,  an  Alsatian  Jew,  a  captain  of  artillery  in  the 
French  army,  had  been  arrested  very  secretly  and  con- 
demned to  be  imprisoned  for  life  in  French  Guiana  for 
selling  military  information,  it  was  said.  He  protested 
his  innocence,  and  soon  his  cause  was  taken  up  by  friends 
and  by  others  who  wished  justice  to  be  done,  and  a  bitter 
and  sensational  controversy  resulted.  After  many  vicissi- 
tudes, which  attracted  the  attention  of  people  all  over 
the  world  then,  but  which  are  of  little  importance  now, 
it  was  demonstrated  that  the  accused  man  was  innocent 
and  that  scandalous  conditions  existed  in  military  circles. 
As  this  became  clear,  the  French  Government  undertook 


226 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Church 
and  State 


The  Con- 
cordat of 
1801 


to  undo  the  wrong  done,  and  in  the  end  gave  Dreyfus  and 
his  associates  complete  and  honorable  vindication.  But 
during  the  years  of  passionate  struggle,  while  this  end  was 
being  attained,  the  government  was  attacked  and  under- 
mined by  monarchists  and  reactionaries,  by  clericals, 
and  by  many  who  desired  France  to  be  a  military  power 
more  than  a  democratic  state.  In  the  end  all  of  this  came 
to  naught  and  was  largely  forgotten. 

As  the  years  went  on  still  further,  with  France  get- 
ting back  some  of  her  old  prestige  in  Europe,  prosper- 
ing greatly  and  increasing  her  wealth,  and  making  the 
Republic  constantly  stronger,  the  French  Government 
proceeded  to  deal  with  the  adjustment  of  the  relations  be- 
tween Church  and  State.  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  Church 
had  claimed  superiority  over  all  earthly  things,  supremacy 
over  secular  government,  and  immunity  from  interference 
by  the  civil  flower.  As  stronger  secular  governments 
developed,  their  officials  refused  to  accept  the  supremacy 
of  the  Church,  and  attempted,  while  not  interfering  with 
religious  matters,  to  subject  ecclesiastical  matters,  or  the 
things  that  concerned  church  regulation,  to  the  civil 
authority  of  the  State.  Some  of  the  greatest  and  most 
memorable  struggles  in  medieval  times  arose  from  con- 
flicts between  these  two  powers.  In  the  period  of  the 
Reformation  and  of  the  development  of  strong  nation 
states  the  matter  was  settled  differently  in  various  places. 
In  Lutheran  countries  the  Church  was  made  strictly  sub- 
ordinate to  the  State,  and  in  England  the  Church  became 
part  of  the  government  itself.  In  Catholic  countries  vari- 
ous arrangements  had  been  made. 

In  France  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  settlement  was 
one  which  had  been  arranged  between  Napoleon  and  Pope 
Pius  VII,  the  so-called  Concordat  of  1801.  This  arrange- 
ment provided  that  the  churches  and  buildings,  which 
along  with  the  church  lands  had  been  confiscated  during 
the  French  Revolution,  and  which  were  in  1801  the  prop- 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


227 


erty  of  the  people,  should  he  granted  to  the  use  of  the 
clergy.  The  higher  eeelesiusties,  the  arehhishops  and  bish- 
ops, were  to  be  appointed  by  the  Freneh  government 
with  the  eonsent  of  the  pope.  Such  ay)p()intments  had 
been  one  of  the  great  causes  of  struggle  between  Emf)ire 
and  Papacy  in  the  Middle  Ages,  and  between  kings  of 
England  and  popes,  and  had  usually  then  been  settled 
by  a  compromise  like  the  Concordat.  The  lower  ec- 
clesiastics, the  priests,  were  to  be  appointed  l)y  the  bishops 
with  the  consent  of  the  government  of  France.  The 
Church  was  controlled  to  a  consideral:>le  extent  by  the 
State,  and  supported  by  it  as  part  of  the  State,  for  the 
salaries  of  the  ecclesiastics  were  paid  by  the  government. 
On  the  other  hand,  in  the  government  the  Church  had 
much  influence  and  power.  This  condition  of  affairs  con- 
tinued on  through  the  nineteenth  century,  with  the  cleri- 
cals looking  back  fondly  to  the  time  before  the  Revolution, 
detesting  the  republicans,  supporting  and  teaching  mon- 
archical principles,  and  hoping  for  a  restoration  of  kings. 

After  1871  the  system  worked  less  well.  Those  who 
supported  the  Republic  believed  that  Church  and  State 
should  be  separate.  On  the  other  hand,  the  bishops  and 
priests  hesitated  not  to  use  their  influence  against  the 
Republic.  INIean while,  the  government  removed  all  clerical 
Influence  from  the  national  system  of  education,  allowing 
no  religious  exercises  in  the  public  schools  and  not  per- 
mitting clergymen  to  teach  in  them.  Peculiar  conditions 
existed  in  France.  Almost  all  of  the  population  was 
Roman  Catholic,  but  a  great  part  of  the  men  were  held 
lightly  by  religious  ties,  and  had  become  accustomed  to 
decide  matters  affecting  the  country  from  the  point  of  view 
of  politics  rather  than  religion.  They  now  proceeded  to 
measures  which  had  never  before  been  brought  about  in  a 
Roman  Catholic  country  except  in  violent  change  or  up- 
heaval. 

The  leaders  of  the  Republic  declared,  with  much  truth. 


Church  and 
State  con- 
nected in 
France 


Clericalism 
and  the  Re- 
public 


228 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Law  of 
Associa- 
tions, 1901 


Separation 
of  Church 
and  State 


that  under  existing  conditions  there  could  not  be  national 
unity,  since  notwithstanding  the  educational  reforms,  the 
religious  orders,  which  had  in  recent  years  increased  enor- 
mously in  influence  and  wealth,  did  a  great  deal  of 
teaching  in  their  private  schools  which  was  directly  hostile 
to  the  government.  Accordingly,  in  1901,  while  the  con- 
troversy about  the  Dreyfus  Affair  was  still  raging,  the 
government  passed  the  so-called  Law  of  Associations,  by 
which  religious  orders  would  not  be  allowed  to  exist  unless 
they  were  authorized  by  the  State.  Many  of  the  religious 
orders  were  not  willing  to  ask  the  government  for  per- 
mission to  exist,  but  the  law  was  enforced  vigorously,  and 
large  numbers  of  monks  and  nuns  were  driven  out  of  their 
establishments.  In  1904  the  government  went  further, 
passing  an  act  which  forbade  even  the  authorized  orders 
to  do  any  teaching  after  1914.  All  this  was  denounced 
by  the  faithful,  who  supported  the  orders,  and  who  be- 
lieved that  their  liberty  was  infringed  when  they  were 
deprived  of  the  right  to  have  their  children  taught  by  the 
instructors  they  most  preferred.  The  State,  however, 
was  now  resolved  to  have  a  monopoly  of  the  education  of 
its  children  and  let  hostile  teachers  do  none  of  it. 

Matters  soon  went  much  further.  Many  Frenchmen, 
moved  by  intellectual  forces  more  than  religious  im- 
pulses, regarded  Roman  Catholicism,  along  with  other 
religions,  as  something  to  be  cherished  by  those  who  wished 
it,  but  not  imposed  in  any  manner  by  the  State  or 
supported  by  government  taxes.  A  great  number  of 
Frenchmen  reasoned  thus  with  much  of  the  tolerant  or 
contemptuous  feeling  for  the  Catholic  faith  which  Voltaire 
and  Diderot  had  long  before  them.  They  were  reinforced 
by  many  others  who  believed  that  clericalism  was  and  had 
from  the  first  been  strongly  hostile  to  the  Republic,  and 
that  the  priests  as  well  as  the  members  of  the  teaching 
orders  aroused  opposition  to  the  government,  and  made 
division  and  weakness  in  the  nation.     They  supported  a 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


229 


principle,  therefore,  wliicli  had  h)ng  before  been  estab- 
hshed  in  the  United  States,  that  Church  and  State  should 
be  separate,  and  that  while  the  Church  in  its  rehgious 
capacity  was  not  to  be  interfered  with  by  the  government, 
it  was  not  any  longer  to  be  supported  by  the  government, 
but  by  voluntary  contributions  from  its  members.  There- 
fore in  1905  a  law  was  passed  which  brought  to  an  end  the 
Concordat  of  180L  By  the  terms  of  the  law,  which  now 
separated  Church  and  State,  something  was  to  be  done  for 
aged  clergymen  and  for  those  who  had  just  become  priests, 
but  the  State  was  no  longer  to  pay  the  salaries  of  church- 
men, nor  was  it  any  longer  to  control  their  appointments. 
The  church  buildings,  still  national  property,  might  be 
used  freely  by  members  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church 
or  of  other  sects,  provided  the  members  of  a  congregation 
formed  an  association  cultuelle  (association  of  worship). 

This  arrangement  seemed  proper  to  many  Frenchmen 
who  were  without  strong  religious  ties.  It  seemed  most 
natural  to  people,  like  those  in  the  United  States,  who  had 
long  been  accustomed  to  separation  of  Church  and  State 
and  believed  that  such  separation  was  not  only  best  for 
the  State  but  of  greatest  possible  good  for  the  Church. 
But  it  violated  much  that  was  deeply  rooted  in  a  vener- 
able past  and  loved  and  respected  by  many  men  and 
most  of  the  women  in  France.  There  had  been  a  great 
deal  of  sympathy  for  the  members  of  religious  orders  who 
seemed  dispossessed  of  their  property  and  driven  forth 
from  their  homes.  Now  there  were  riotous  scenes  about 
some  of  the  churches.  Not  a  few  Catholics,  however, 
believed  that  the  trend  of  modern  conditions  made 
separation  best  for  the  Church ;  and  some  of  the  ecclesias- 
tics were  willing  at  least  to  compromise  with  the  authori- 
ties of  the  State.  But  the  pope  condemned  the  law,  and 
good  Catholics  had  then  to  oppose  it.  In  1907  the  govern- 
ment passed  a  further  law  by  which  the  churches  might 
be  used  free  of  cost  provided  the  priest  or  minister  made  a 


The  Church 
to  be  sup- 
ported by 
its  members 


Troubles 
resultant 


230 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


France  torn 
by  the 
struggle 


National 
wealth 


contract  therefor  with  the  local  officials.  The  Republic 
was  stirred  to  its  depths  during  the  years  which  followed, 
and  division  between  two  bodies  of  the  population  seemed 
greater  than  ever;  but  the  authorities,  supported  by 
socialists,  progressives,  radicals,  and  others,  were  firm, 
and  in  the  end  seemed  to  have  the  support  of  most  of  the 
nation.  Separation  of  Church  and  State  was  definitely 
accomplished  in  spite  of  the  opposition  raised  up  against 
it.  Nevertheless,  it  was  truly  felt  that  there  was  now 
between  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,  which  taught  the 
faith  nominally,  at  least,  of  almost  all  the  French  people, 
and  the  government  of  the  Republic,  a  breach  which  time 
only  could  heal.  Actually  the  division  continued  until 
the  beginning  of  the  Great  War,  when  in  the  fearful  danger 
and  sufferings  of  the  years  after  1914  churchmen  rallied 
loyallj^  to  the  patrie,  and  many  of  the  people  came  back 
to  the  Church  more  than  for  a  great  while  before. 

During  all  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
wealth  increased  in  France,  not  as  in  Britain  where  it  was 
based  on  industrial  development  and  the  carrying  trade 
of  the  world,  nor  in  Germany  where  it  came  from  marvel- 
ous industrial  and  commercial  expansion,  nor  in  the  United 
States  where  the  people  had  as  gifts  from  nature  the  great- 
est resources  man  ever  fell  heir  to,  but  beyond  what 
Frenchmen  had  ever  possessed  before.  And  if  the  total 
amount  of  this  wealth  was  not  so  great  as  in  England  or  the 
United  States,  and  if  the  standard  of  living  was  lower 
than  in  the  English-speaking  countries,  yet  it  was  ap- 
parently true  that  nowhere  else  was  there  so  high  an 
average  prosperity  or  such  a  wide  distribution  of  property 
among  so  great  a  number  of  people.  This  arose  from  two 
causes,  in  which  France  seemed,  whether  rightly  or 
wrongly,  to  be  in  advance  of  the  rest  of  the  world;  the  land 
was  very  widely  distributed  among  a  large  number  of  pro- 
prietors, and  the  size  of  families  was  small. 

In  France  one  of  the  most  important  results  of  the 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


231 


Revolution  was  that  the  lands,  previously  owned  })y 
nobles  or  Church,  were  taken  from  tlieir  owners  and  sold 
by  the  State  to  the  people.  Li  this  way  a  great  deal  of 
landed  property,  formerly  in  possession  of  a  few  wealthy 
proprietors — as  was  the  case  in  Russia  until  the  Revolution 
of  1917,  and  as  was  largely  the  case  in  Britain  until  the 
terrible  taxation  of  the  war — changed  hands,  and  in  course 
of  time  was  sold  to  numerous  peasant  farmers.  The 
result  of  this  was  to  create  a  large  body  of  small  owners, 
having  the  means  to  achieve  greater  prosperity  and  well- 
being  than  ever  before.  Some  observers  who  lived  then 
believed  that  this  amelioration  was  only  for  the  time. 
They  said  that  the  lands  would  soon  get  out  of  the  posses- 
sion of  the  new  owners,  or  else  that  they,  having  more 
children  because  they  could  support  them,  would  be  no 
better  off;  and  that  when  the  holdings  were  divided 
among  these  larger  families  of  the  next  generation  there 
would  again  be  miserable  cultivators  living  upon  scanty 
patches  of  ground.  Previous  to  this  time  the  birth-rate 
in  France  had  been  high.  Now,  Arthur  Young,  the 
celebrated  traveller,  predicted  that  the  country  w^ould 
become  a  veritable  rabbit-warren,  so  fast  would  the  popula- 
tion breed.  But  this  did  not  take  place.  About  the 
middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  English  economist, 
John  Stuart  Mill,  noticed  that  the  French  birth-rate  had 
fallen,  and  that  families  were  much  smaller.  He  ex- 
plained this  by  saying  that  the  new  body  of  proprietors, 
accustomed  to  a  higher  standard  of  living,  refused  to 
lower  it  by  having  more  children  than  they  could  prop- 
erly support;  that  they  were  also  unwilling  to  lower  the 
standard  of  the  next  generation  by  dividing  their  property 
among  so  many  children  that  the  amount  for  each  would 
be  insufficient. 

All  through  the  century  this  tendency  continued  with 
ever-greater  force.  By  the  time  of  the  Franco-German 
War  the  population  of  the  country  was  no  longer  increasing 


Property 
and  birth- 
rate 


Previous 
high  birth- 
rate in 
France 


S33 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Declining 
birth-rate 
and  station- 
ary popula- 
tion 


Birth-rate 
and  stand- 
ard of  living 


rapidly,  and  since  that  time  it  has  scarcely  increased  at  all. 
The  results  have  seemed  good  and  bad.  On  the  one  hand, 
there  has  been,  compared  with  the  past  and  with  the  pres- 
ent in  other  European  countries,  a  generally  high  stand- 
ard of  living.  For  many  Frenchmen  there  has  been  a 
great  amount  of  leisure  and  comfort,  which  has  enabled 
them  to  be  the  foremost  leaders  of  civilization  and  thought, 
and  to  enjoy  deeply,  in  their  manner,  the  civilization  of 
their  era.  On  the  other  hand,  the  population  of  France 
has  stood  still  while  that  of  Britain  has  overtaken  it, 
and  while  that  of  Germany  threatened  to  become  twice 
as  large.  Hence,  there  was  always  the  danger  that  France 
might  be  overwhelmed  by  superior  numbers.  It  was, 
perhaps,  this  growing  numerical  inferiority  more  than 
anything  else  that  made  it  impossible  for  France,  after 
she  had  recovered  from  the  defeat  of  1871,  to  think  of 
undertaking  a  successful  war  of  revenge.  It  was  in  vain 
that  the  government  tried  to  encourage  larger  families, 
offering  to  exempt  the  father  of  several  children  from 
taxation,  and  even  offering  prizes  to  the  mothers  of  large 
families.  There  were  a  few  large  families,  but  always  they 
were  the  exception.  Generally  the  birth-rate  remained 
so  low  that  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century 
there  was  much  fear  that  the  population  might  even  be 
declining,  and  that  France  was  a  dying  nation,  destined 
after  a  while  to  disappear.  Enemies  of  France  declared 
that  this  stationary  or  declining  population  and  small 
birth-rate  showed  that  the  French  were  a  decadent  people; 
and  that  in  France  in  1900,  as  in  the  dying  Roman  Empire 
long  before,  there  was  no  longer  enough  vigor  to  produce 
the  men  and  women  to  carry  on  the  destiny  of  the  nation. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  was  insistently  declared  that  what 
was  taking  place  in  France  was  only  what  had  always 
characterized  highly  civilized  people,  who  had  risen  to 
better  intelligence  and  standard  of  living;  that  it  was 
actually  manifest  among  the  upper  and  more  intelligent 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


233 


classes  in  all  of  the  highly  developed  nations  of  the  world; 
and  that  the  only  thing  which  was  peculiar  in  France  was 
that  well-being  and  intelligence  were  so  universally  dif- 
fused, that  what  existed  solely  among  the  upper  classes 
elsewhere  prevailed  in  France  among  most  of  the  people. 

The  foreign  affairs  of  the  nation  during  this  period  were 
concerned  chiefly  with  the  recovery  of  France,  getting 
allies  to  stand  with  her  against  the  combination  formed 
by  the  German  Empire,  and  building  up  a  colonial  em- 
pire. The  recovery  of  France  was  beset  with  difficulties 
that  seemed  very  disheartening  then.  Not  only  did 
she  have  to  pay  the  indenmity  and  repair  the  losses 
caused  by  her  disastrous  defeat,  but  when  once  the  money 
had  been  paid  to  Germany  and  recovery  was  going  well 
forward,  she  was  watched  with  jealous  suspicion  by  the 
Germans.  They,  having  overthrouTi  and  plundered  her, 
wished  that  she  might  remain  weak  and  without  friends 
to  assist  her,  so  that  she  could  not  possibly  take  venge- 
ance. At  first  the  French,  smarting  under  their  humilia- 
tion and  the  sense  of  their  wrongs,  declared  openly  that 
they  w^ould  have  revenge  as  soon  as  they  could.  Bismarck 
and  his  military  colleagues  had  believed  that  the  terms  of 
the  treaty  were  such  that  France  would  remain  weak  for 
some  time;  but  when  the  indemnity  was  paid  off  sooner 
than  had  been  considered  possible,  and  the  French  people 
went  forward  in  marvellously  swift  recuperation,  Germany 
looked  on  with  growing  uneasiness  and  suspicion.  It 
was  not  that  Germans  doubted  that  they  could  defeat 
France  again;  but  some  of  the  leaders  taught  the  doctrine 
that  if  another  war  must  be  fought,  it  would  be  easier 
and  wiser  to  strike  the  enemy  down  before  he  recov- 
ered full  strength. 

In  this  manner  arose  the  once  famous  Affair  of  1875. 
France  had  adopted  the  Prussian  system  of  universal 
military  training,  and  in  that  year  passed  a  law  to  com- 
plete the  reorganization  of  her  army.     \Miat  followed  is 


Foreign 
relations 


The  Affair 
of  1875 


234 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Alleged  Ger- 
man plan 
to  strike 
France 


The  Schnae- 
bele  Affair 


still  enveloped  in  some  obscurity;  but  it  would  seem 
that  German  leaders  believed  it  would  be  well  to  strike 
before  the  new  law  could  produce  its  effects,  and  that 
Bismarck  desired  to  impose  a  new  treaty  by  which  France 
would  not  be  permitted  to  maintain  a  large  army.  How- 
ever this  be,  it  is  certain  that  there  was  a  great  war  scare, 
and  that  the  French  feared  they  would  be  attacked.  If 
such  was  the  German  intention,  it  speedily  brought  from 
Russia  and  from  Great  Britain  intimation  that  they  would 
not  this  time  stand  aside  and  see  France  first  attacked  and 
then  crushed ;  and  soon  the  crisis  was  over:  The  result  was 
that  France  now  passed  definitely  out  of  the  position  of 
hopeless  inferiority  in  which  she  had  been  left  in  1871,  and 
gained  steadily  in  strength  and  assurance. 

But  however  swift  and  splendid  her  recovery  was,  it 
came  too  late  to  enable  her  to  settle  her  account  with  the 
Germans.  As  the  years  passed  France  grew  stronger  and 
greater  than  before,  but  meanwhile  Germany  was  growing 
much  more  rapidly  still  in  population,  wealth,  and 
military  power.  It  would  have  been  madness  for  France 
to  begin  war  upon  Germany  single-handed,  and  mean- 
while she  had  no  allies.  The  German  Empire  was  the 
center  and  head  of  the  greatest  military  alliance  in  the 
world,  and  all  through  Bismarck's  time  France  remained 
in  isolation.  But  as  time  went  on  Russia  drew  away  from 
Germany;  and  it  seemed  to  Frenchmen  that  their  chance 
might  some  day  come  if  Germany  were  involved  in  war 
with  Russia,  or  if  Russia  formed  an  alliance  with  France. 
In  1887  relations  between  the  two  countries  were  strained 
as  a  result  of  the  Boulanger  Affair,  and  also  because  of 
the  arrest  by  the  German  Government  of  M.  Schnsebele, 
a  French  official,  near  the  frontier.  During  the  crisis 
Russia  moved  troops  toward  the  German  border,  showing 
clearly  her  attitude  toward  Germany  and  France.  Bis- 
marck speaking  in  the  Reichstag  had  said  that  if  France 
again  attacked  Germany  "we  should  endeavor  to  make 


Alliance; 
Russia  and 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE  235 

France  incapable  of  attacking  us  for  tliirty  years  .  ,  . 
each  would  seek  to  bleed  the  other  white."  But  Schnae- 
bele  was  released,  and  Boulanger's  efforts  came  to  nothing. 

With  the  passing  of  Bismarck  and  the  beginning  of  a  The  Dual 
new  policy  by  William  II,  a  great  change  came  swiftly  to 
pass:  Russia  and  France  drew  together  in  the  Dual  Alii-  France 
ance.  There  had  been  obstacles  enough  in  the  way  with- 
out the  skilful  manipulation  of  Bismarck.  Napoleon  I 
had  invaded  Russia  and  brouglit  about  the  burning  of 
Moscow,  and  Napoleon  III  had  been  the  leader  of  the 
combination  which  crushed  Russia  in  the  Crimean  War, 
On  the  other  hand.  Frenchmen  remembered  the  terrible 
retreat  of  the  Grand  Army  in  1812,  and  they  had  recently 
seen  Russia  stand  as  the  friend  of  Prussia  while  Prussia 
was  humbling  France  in  the  dust.  Moreover,  Frenchmen 
had  been  the  leaders  in  political  reform  in  Europe,  and 
now  constituted  the  largest  body  of  self-governing  freemen 
on  the  Continent;  while  in  Russia  it  seemed  that  selfish 
and  reactionary  autocrats  held  the  people  in  lowly  con- 
dition. But  the  mere  fact  that  Russia  and  France  were  Russia  and 
separated  and  some  distance  apart  served  to  remove  evil  France  need 
memories  and  causes  of  friction.  Now  they  were  both 
isolated  as  a  result  of  German  statecraft,  France  in  the 
west,  Russia  in  the  east.  They  both  needed  allies,  France 
felt  insecure  without  the  support  of  some  powerful  friend, 
as  did  Russia  who,  moreover,  badly  needed  money  for 
internal  development,  which  could  be  obtained  now  in 
France  better  than  anywhere  else.  These  causes  operated 
swiftly,  once  the  influence  of  Bismarck  was  removed. 
Even  before  his  fall  the  Russian  Government,  which  had 
previously  borrowed  in  Germany,  began  placing  huge 
loans  in  France,  Apparently  also  she  desired  to  have 
France  as  a  helper.  Negotiations  and  friendly  visits  began 
in  1890,  Then  in  1892  the  two  powers  entered  into  an 
entente  or  friendly  understanding,  and  in  the  next  year 
a  military  convention  was  signed.     It  was  believed  then 


each  other 


236 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Effect  of  the 
Dual  Alli- 
ance 


Rivalry  of 
France  and 
Great 
Britain 


and  for  a  long  time  afterward  that  a  treaty  of  alliance  had 
been  made,  but  in  1918  the  publication  of  a  French  Yellow 
Book  made  it  plain  that  no  treaty  of  alliance  had  been 
signed,  and  that  what  had  long  popularly  been  designated 
as  the  Dual  Alliance  rested  upon  the  entente  and  the  Mili- 
tary Convention  of  1892-3.  The  agi'eement  stipulated 
that  in  case  one  of  the  parties  to  the  treaty  were  attacked 
by  Germany,  the  other  would  stand  by  its  partner  with  all 
its  power.  ^Mien  in  1914  Germany  was  about  to  declare 
war  upon  Russia,  she  demanded  to  know  what  France 
would  then  do,  and  the  French  Government  not  satisfying 
her,  she  declared  war  also  upon  France. 

The  result  of  the  Dual  Alliance  of  1893  was  in  some 
sense  to  restore  the  balance  of  power  in  Europe,  to  take 
France  out  of  her  position  of  loneliness  and  inferiority, 
and  to  shake  the  hegemony  of  the  German  Empire.  But 
actually  it  did  little  beyond  making  France  feel  more  se- 
cure. The  Triple  Alliance  was  believed  by  competent  ob- 
servers to  be  stronger  than  its  rival;  and  France  and 
Russia  were,  moreover,  in  active  rivalry  with  Great  Brit- 
ain. Therefore,  after  1893,  as  before,  France  found  that 
it  was  hopeless  to  think  of  attacking  Germany  to  get  back 
the  lost  provinces  and  restore  her  position;  and  in  course 
of  time  desire  and  expectation  of  doing  this  so  far  died 
out  that  they  cannot  be  reckoned  as  important  causes  of 
the  War  of  1914-18. 

In  the  course  of  the  generation  after  the  Franco-German 
War  France  came  into  dangerous  and  increasing  rivalry 
with  Great  Britain.  This  resulted  from  colonial  expan- 
sion and  the  naval  expansion  w^hich  went  with  it.  \Mien 
once  her  recovery  was  well  begun,  France  again  turned 
her  eyes  beyond  Europe  with  the  purpose  of  building  up  a 
larger  colonial  empire  and  retrieving  abroad  her  losses. 
She  had  great  success  in  north  Africa,  in  southeastern 
Asia,  and  in  some  of  the  islands,  especially  Madagascar; 
and  it  was  no  long  time  before  she  had  built  up  the  second 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE 


237 


colonial  empire  in  the  world.  Along  with  this  went  naval 
expansion,  which  awakened  the  ever-watchful  jealousy  of 
Britain.  Especially  was  this  so  after  the  formation  of  the 
Dual  Alliance,  for  p]ngland  was  af)prehensive  of  Russian 
expansion  in  Asia  down  toward  India,  just  as  she  was  of 
French  naval  increase  and  French  exi)ansion  in  northern 
Africa  toward  the  Nile.  Great  tension  and  much  hostility 
developed  year  by  year,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  cen- 
tury the  situation  seemed  fraught  with  the  ominous 
possibilities  of  conflict  which  a  decade  later  made  the  rela- 
tions between  Germany  and  England  so  dangerous.  The 
crisis  came  in  1898,  when  British  forces,  which  had  moved 
up  from  Egypt  and  just  conquered  the  Sudan,  came  in 
contact  with  French  forces  which  had  moved  eastward 
across  Africa  to  Fashoda  on  the  upper  Nile  and  there 
hoisted  the  French  flag.  England  demanded  that  France 
withdraw,  and  this  was  at  first  refused.  But  it  was  as 
hopeless  for  France  to  contend  with  the  overwhelming 
sea  power  of  Britain  as  it  was  for  her  to  contest  with 
Germany  on  the  Rhine,  and  so  she  yielded  completely. 
The  episode  left  great  bitterness  in  the  hearts  of  French- 
men. At  this  time  some  of  them  believed  that  they  had 
best  forget  the  past  and  join  with  Germany  against  Eng- 
land, their  traditional  foe.  Until  this  time,  however, 
Germany  had  seemed  drawing  closer  and  closer  to  Eng- 
land. But  in  reality  a  turning-point  had  been  reached. 
Germany  and  England  were  just  about  to  begin  drawing 
apart  in  bitterest  rivalry,  which  was  one  day  to  lead  to 
war;  while  after  a  few  years  England  and  France  were  to 
enter  into  a  friendship  which  would  be  the  salvation  of 
them  both  later  on. 


Competition 
in  colonial 
expansion 


France 
yields  to 
Great 
Britain 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


General  accounts:  Gabriel  Hanotaux,  Histoire  de  la  France 
Coniemporaine,  4  vols.  (1903-5),  trans,  by  J.  C.  Tarver,  Con- 
temporary France,  4  vols.  (1903-9),  best,  covers  the  period  1870- 


238  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

188i?;  the  most  recent  work  of  importance  is  Emile  Bourgeois, 
whose  work,  done  for  the  Cambridge  Historical  Series  was  trans- 
lated into  English,  Modern  France,  2  vols.  (1919);  J.  C.  Bracq, 
France  Under  the  Republic  (1910);  Samuel  Dems,  Histoire  Con- 
temporaine,  4  vols.  (1897-1903),  from  the  fall  of  the  Empire 
to  the  work  of  the  National  Assembly;  F.  Despagnet,  LaDiplo- 
maiie  de  la  Troisieme  Republique  et  le  Droit  des^  Gens  (1904); 
Frederick  Lawton,  The  Third  Republic  (1909);  Emile  Simond, 
Histoire  de  la  Troisieme  Republique  de  1887  ct  1894  (1913) ;  Edgar 
Zevort,  Histoire  de  la  Troisieme  Republique,  4  vols.  (2d  ed.  1898- 
1901),  covers  the  period  1870-94. 

The  Commune:  Maxime  Du  Camp,  Les  Convulsions  de  Paris, 
4  vols.  (.5th  ed.  1881),  conservative;  Edmond  Lepelletier,  His- 
toire de  la  Commune  de  1871,  2  vols.  (1911-12),  best;  P.  O. 
Lissagaray,  English  trans,  by  E.  M.  Aveling,  History  of  the 
Commune  of  1871  (2d  ed.  1898),  by  an  ardent  sympathizer; 
E.  B.  Washburne,  Franco-German  War  and  Insurrection  of  the 
Commune  (1878). 

The  beginning  of  the  restoration  of  France:  Paul  Deschanel, 
Gambetta  (1919);  Jules  Simon,  Le  Gouvernement  de  M.  Thiers, 
8  Fevrier  1871-U  Mai  1873,  2  vols.  (1879),  trans.,  2  vols.  (1879) ; 
L.  A.  Thiers,  Notes  et  Souvenirs  de  M.  Thiers,  1870-1873  (1903), 
trans,  by  F.  M.  Atkinson,  Memoirs  of  M.  Thiers,  1870-1873 
(1915);  Edgar  Zevort,  Thiers  (1892);  J.  Valfrey,  Histoire  de  la 
Diplomatie  du  Gouvernement  de  la  DSfense  Nationale,  3  vols. 
(1871-3),  Histoire  du  TraitS  de  Francfort  et  de  la  LibSration  du 
Territoire,  2  vols.  (1874-5),  the  latter  contains  valuable  mater- 
ials not  elsewhere  published. 

Government  and  customs:  Raymond  Poincare,  trans,  by  B. 
Miall,  How  France  Is  Governed  (1914),  excellent  brief  treatise; 
Barrett  Wendell,  The  France  of  To-day,  (1907). 

Political  parties:  Leon  Jacques,  Les  Parties  Politiques  sous 
la  Troisieme  Ripublique  (1913). 

Church  and  state:  Aristide  Briand,  La  Separation  des  ^glises 
et  de  rEtnt  (1905) ;  E.  Lecannet,  VEglise  de  France  sous  la  Trois- 
ieme RSpublique,  2  vols.  (1907-10),  Catholic,  covers  the  period  to 
1894;  Paul  Sabatier,  A  propos  de  la  Separation  des  Eglises  et  de 
VEtat  (4th  ed.  1906),  trans.  Disestablishment  in  France  (1906). 

The  Dreyfus  Affair:  Joseph  Reinach,  Histoire  de  V Affaire 
Dreyfus,  7  vols.  (1898-1911),  best,  sympathetic. 

Foreign  politics:  H.  G  de  Blowitz,  Memoirs  (1903);  R.  de 
Caix,  Fashoda  (1899);  G.  Hanotaux,  Fachoda  (1909);  R.  Pinon, 


THE    DUAL    ALLIANCE  239 

VEmjyire  de  la  MediterranSe  (1904),  France  et  Allemagne,  1870- 
1913(1913). 

The  Dual  Alliance:  the  all-important  source  is  Documents 
Diplomatufues,  r Alliance  Franco-Russe,  published  by  the  French 
Government  (1918);  E.  de  Cyon,  Ilifiloire  de  V Entente  Franco- 
Rnss-e,  ISSG-ISQ^^  (3d  ed.  1895),  to  be  used  with  caution;  E. 
Daudet,  Saiivenirs  et  Revelations,  Ilistoire  Diplomatique  de 
V Alliance  Franco-Russe,  1873-1893  (3d  ed.  1893),  to  be  used 
cautiously;  C.  de  S.  de  Freycinet,  Souvenirs,  1878-93  (1913), 
valuable,  by  one  of  the  principal  participants;  V.  de  Gorloff, 
Origines  et  Bases  de  V Alliance  Franco-Russe  (1913) ;  J.  J.  Hansen, 
U Alliance  Franco-Russe  (1897),  by  a  participant;  A.  Tardieu, 
La  France  et  les  Alliances  (1904),  English  trans.  France  and  the 
Alliances  (1908),  excellent. 


Great  Brit- 
ain in  the 
past  genera- 
tion 


CHAPTER  X 
DEMOCRATIC  BRITAIN 

Metbinks  I  see  in  my  mind  a  noble  and  puissant  nation  rousing  herself 
like  a  strong  man  after  sleep,  and  shaking  her  invincible  locks; 
methinks  I  see  her  as  an  eagle  mewing  her  mighty  youth,  and 
kindling  her  undazzled  eyes  at  the  full  midday  beam.     .     .     . 
Milton,  Areopagitica  (1644). 

There  is  no  country  so  interested  in  the  maintenance  of  peace  as 
England.  .  .  .  She  is  not  an  aggressive  power,  for  there  is 
nothing  that  she  desires.  .  .  .  What  she  wishes  is  to  maintain 
and  to  enjoy  the  unexampled  Empire  which  she  has  built  up,  and 
which  it  is  her  pride  to  remember  exists  as  much  upon  sympathy 
as  upon  force. 

Speech  of  the  Earl  of  Beaconsfield  at  the  Lord  Mayor's 
Banquet,  London  Times,  November  10,  1876. 

Britische  Herrschsucht  und  Handelseifersucht  sind  die  Triebfedern 
gewesen,  welche  die  Welt  organisiert  und  in  Bewegung  gesetzt 
haben,  um  den  Vernichtungskrieg  gegen  ein  friedliebendes  Volk 
zu  fuhren; 

Graf  Ernst  Reventlow,  Deutschlands  Auswartige  Poliiik,  1888— 
19U  (ed.  1918),  p.  477. 

The  history  of  Great  Britain  in  the  later  period  has  to 
do  largely  with  the  growth  of  the  British  Empire,  with 
great  and  increasing  dangers  which  threatened,  and  after- 
ward with  a  mighty  triumph.  In  most  respects  it  is  a 
record  of  prosperity  and  power.  But  more  important, 
perhaps,  it  is  also  a  story  of  increasing  control  of  the 
government  by  the  people,  until  at  last  the  British  have 
become  one  of  the  most  democratic  nations  in  the  world. 
This  very  progress  has  brought  them  serious  problems, 
perplexing  and  not  yet  settled. 

By  the  Electoral  Reform  Law  of  1867  only  a  part  of  the 
lower  class  was  allowed  to  vote,  but  seventeen  years  later 

240 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  241 

the  franchise  was  extended  also  to  the  agricultural  workers     The  Rep- 

and  the  laborers  in  the  mines.     Bv  this  Reform  Law  of     r^senta- 

I  1     I         '  1         1  1  tion  of  the 

1884,  2,000,000  men  were  added  to  the  electorate  so  that      peopie  Act 

5,000,000  persons  had  the  franchise,  or  one  person  out  of  1884 
every  seven  of  the  population.  Manhood  suffrage  was 
not  yet  established,  as  it  had  been  in  France  and  in  the 
German  Empire,  though  actually  almost  every  man  was 
now  allowed  to  vote,  and  the  representatives  elected  by 
them  to  the  House  of  Commons  held  the  principal  powers 
of  the  government  and  directly  controlled  the  executive 
organ  of  the  State.  Meanwhile,  the  year  before,  a  Corrupt 
Practices  Act  limited  the  amount  of  money  a  candi- 
date might  spend  for  election  expenses,  and  provided 
such  severe  penalties  for  bribery  and  corruption  as  to 
bring  them  virtually  to  an  end  in  Great  Britain.  The 
year  after  the  Electoral  Reform  Law,  the  Redistribution 
Act  of  1885  practically  divided  Great  Britain  into  electoral 
districts,  bringing  representation  into  accord  with  popula- 
tion. Previously  representation  had  been  by  counties 
and  by  boroughs.  Now  the  small  boroughs  were  merged 
into  their  counties,  most  of  the  larger  ones  were  made 
one-member  constituencies,  the  counties  were  divided  into 
one-member  constituencies  on  the  basis  of  the  population 
within  them,  and  the  larger  cities  were  given  representa- 
tion in  accordance  with  the  number  of  inhabitants  in  them. 
Thus  practically  was  brought  to  pass  parliamentary  repre- 
sentation of  people,  instead  of  districts  or  corporations, 
something  that  had  been  proposed  in  Cromwell's  time 
but  soon  discarded. 

This  wide  extension  of  the  electorate  in  England  was  The 
accompanied,  as  it  was  in  the  L'nited  States,  by  persistent  women's 
demand  for  the  extension  of  democracy  upon  a  broader 
basis  by  admitting  not  only  more  men  to  a  share  in  the 
government  but  also  the  women  of  the  nation.  The 
women's  movement  in  Great  Britain,  as  in  the  United 
States,  went  on  for  a  considerable  time  before  it  got  much 


movement 


242 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


In  earlier 
times 


The  work  of 
the  Quakers 


Women 
more  nu- 
merous than 
men  in 
England 


attention,  and  when  at  last  it  was  noticed,  it  was  older 
than  most  people  suspected.  During  the  period  of  the 
Puritan  Revolution,  and  also  more  than  a  hundred  years 
later  in  France  during  the  French  Revolution,  women 
demanded  their  "rights"  as  equals  with  men,  and  asked 
to  share  in  the  governing  of  the  State.  Nevertheless, 
the  feminist  movement  is  essentially  a  thing  of  the 
nineteenth  century.  It  was  only  the  effects  of  the 
French  Revolution,  and  more  particularly  of  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  that  made  it  possible  for  most  women  to 
escape  from  the  inferior  position  in  which  they  had  always 
previously  been  held.  When  in  1792  Mary  Godwin 
declared  that  "women  ought  to  have  representatives 
instead  of  being  arbitrarily  governed,"  she  was  regarded  as 
a  foolish  radical.  It  is  true  that  in  New  Jersey,  one  of 
the  American  states,  in  the  period  1797-1807,  women 
were  actually  permitted  to  vote,  but  this  was  an  isolated 
case,  and  in  both  of  the  great  English-speaking  countries 
during  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  advocates 
of  women's  suffrage,  principally  Quakers,  were  consid- 
ered to  be  urging  something  impracticable  and  immoral, 
something  contrary  to  the  laws  of  God.  But  in  England 
especially,  where  the  Industrial  Revolution  first  made  such 
great  headway,  conditions  changed  profoundly,  and,  with 
them,  the  position  of  women,  so  that  it  was  no  longer  pos- 
sible to  apply  the  old  arguments  with  such  effect  as  before. 
Formerly  woman's  place  had  been  the  home,  and  it  was 
supposed  that  almost  all  would  marry,  but  now  a  great 
number  worked  for  wages  in  factories  outside  the  supervis- 
ion of  their  men  at  the  same  time  that  more  and  more  men 
emigrated  to  the  colonies  of  the  Empire.  By  the  middle 
of  the  nineteenth  century  there  were  365,000  more  women 
than  men  in  England,  and  over  1,000,000  more  in  1900. 
It  was  obviously  impossible  for  a  large  number  of  Eng- 
lish women  to  marry,  and  it  was  evident  that  many  were 
supporting  themselves.     In  many  cases  they  were  paying 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


243 


taxes,  but  they  had  no  voice  in  the  government,  no  con- 
trol over  those  who  made  laws  aU'ecting  them;  they  were 
subject  to  taxation  williout  rej)resentation.  At  the  same 
time  women  were  steadily  having  their  minds  broadened 
by  more  education  than  women  had  ever  had  before,  and 
they  were  develo[)ing  a  greater  sense  of  responsibility, 
stronger  feeling  of  individuality,  and  greater  sense  of 
their  dignity  and  power.  It  seemed  to  them  that  the 
doctrines  established  by  their  forefathers,  and  proclaimed 
so  grandly  during  the  French  Revolution,  that  all  men 
were  equal  and  that  government  depended  on  the  consent 
of  the  governed,  that  these  doctrines  applied  to  women  as 
well  as  to  men. 

Both  in  England  and  the  United  States  feminist  re- 
formers got  some  ridicule  but  not  much  attention.  Most 
of  the  women,  conservative  and  timid,  had  no  interest  in 
the  movement,  and  most  men  were  opposed  to  it  because 
it  ran  counter  to  a  vast  mass  of  old  custom  and  established 
ideas.  But  in  1866  John  Stuart  INIill  moved  in  the  House 
of  Commons  to  include  women  in  the  provisions  of  the 
bill  then  pending  to  extend  the  franchise.  He  declared 
that  women's  interests  were  closely  connected  with  men's, 
and  that  unless  men  helped  them  to  rise,  they  would  pull 
men  down  to  a  lower  condition.  His  proposal  was  easily 
defeated,  but  thereafter  almost  every  year  a  bill  was  pro- 
posed to  allow  women  to  vote. 

To  advocates  the  progress  of  the  movement  often  seemed 
slow,  but  actually  it  was  far  more  rapid  than  any  previous 
movement  to  extend  the  suffrage  to  men.  It  was  not  al- 
ways remembered  that  until  the  beginning  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  the  franchise,  if  held  at  all,  was  confined 
almost  entirely  to  a  few  men  of  the  upper  classes.  Act- 
ually after  a  while  women  in  England  were  allowed  to  vote 
and  be  voted  for  in  local  elections,  and  it  was  generally 
believed  that  they  had  a  higher  position  than  the  women 
of  any  other  country  except,  probably,  the  United  States. 


Changes 
affecting 
women 


The 

women's 
suffrage 
movement 


Progress  of 
the  move- 
ment 


10.    THE  BRITISH  ISLES 
244 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  245 

One  by  one  the  old  legul  inequalities  were  abolished,  until 
scarcely  any  renuiined,  and  women's  economic  opjior- 
tunities  became  constantly  belter.  Nevertheless,  they 
were  still  subject  to  some  discriminations,  and  an  ever- 
increasing  numlKT  of  them,  who  desired  complete  equality 
with  men,  believed  that  this  could  never  be  attained, 
and  that  women  would  never  be  able  to  take  their  proper 
share  of  the  duties  of  the  commonwealth  until  they  were 
admitted  to  vote  for  memljcrs  of  parliament  upon  the 
same  conditions  as  men. 

The  movement  continued  to  make  slow  but  certain  The 
progress,  though  the  majority  of  the  people,  both  men  and  ^"  ragettes 
women,  continued  to  be  against  it.  Finally,  about  1905, 
a  small  number  of  more  radical  women,  under  the  leader- 
ship of  Mrs.  Emmeline  Pankhurst,  tiring  at  impediments 
and  delay,  lack  of  public  interest  and  attention,  under- 
took to  procure  votes  for  women  by  force  and  compulsion, 
which,  they  said,  had  been  the  method  that  men  had 
employed.  Then  for  a  few  years  was  carried  on  a  cam- 
paign ridiculous  and  alarming.  "Wild  women,"  as  they 
were  called,  screamed  and  interrupted  public  meetings, 
harassed  public  officials,  interfered  with  the  carrying 
on  of  the  government  in  which  they  had  no  part,  and 
perpetrated  all  sorts  of  petty  violence  and  outrage.  When 
arrested  and  imprisoned  they  tried  the  "hunger  strike," 
which  had  previously  been  employed  by  political  prisoners 
in  Russia,  starving  themselves,  so  that  the  government, 
which  desired  that  no  woman  should  be  killed  in  this 
contest,  invariably  released  them.  By  1914  these  suffra- 
gettes had  become  so  great  a  menace  and  nuisance  that 
some  foreigners  believed  Englishmen  to  be  decadent  and 
not  capable  of  deahng  with  troublesome  questions.  The 
suffragettes  did  attract  a  great  deal  of  attention  for  their 
cause,  but  they  also  aroused  much  hostility  and  strong 
dislike.  They  had  set  the  dangerous  precedent  of  women 
employing  force,  when  the  whole  tendency  of  civilization 


246 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Extension 
of  the 
franchise, 
1918 


Changes  in 
representa- 
tion sug- 
gested 


had  been  for  force  not  to  be  employed  against  women. 
Moreover,  they  afforded  one  of  the  first  conspicuous 
examples  of  a  procedure — since  not  uncommon — of  an  or- 
ganized minority  boldly  making  itself  intolerable  so  as  to 
compel  the  yielding  of  the  things  which  it  wanted.  But 
when  the  war  began  in  1914  they  immediately  ceased 
their  campaign,  and  rallied  to  the  support  of  the  country. 
During  the  contest  the  women  of  Great  Britain  performed 
indispensable  and  tremendous  service,  and  it  was  generally 
recognized  that  the  suJffrage  should  be  given  to  them  if  they 
desired  it. 

The  great  expansion  of  democratic  feeling  in  Enghsh- 
speaking  countries  during  the  war  now  led  to  a  further 
extension  of  the  suflFrage  to  men,  and  at  the  same  time 
many  women  were  also  admitted.  In  1918  all  men  over 
twenty-one,  with  fixed  residence  or  business  premises  for 
six  months,  and  all  women  already  entitled  to  vote  in 
local  elections  and  women  whose  husbands  were  so  en- 
titled, were  given  the  parliamentary  franchise.  The 
electorate  was  thus  increased  by  2,000,000  men  and 
6,000,000  women,  so  that  now  one  out  of  every  three  of 
the  entire  population  could  vote,  thus  extending  the 
suffrage  to  a  larger  portion  of  the  population  than  had 
been  done  in  any  great  country  before.  The  government 
of  the  United  Kingdom  had  been  put  into  the  hands  of  its 
people  about  as  far  as  was  possible  under  the  existing 
system;  and  the  people  had  more  complete  control  and 
were  able  to  make  their  wishes  felt  more  immediately  and 
directly  than  in  any  other  great  nation  in  the  world.  It 
was  said  now  by  some  that  further  reform  must  lie,  not  so 
much  in  the  direction  of  extending  the  suffrage  as  in  so 
changing  the  system  that  industries  and  groups,  rather 
than  districts,  should  be  represented.  Thus,  it  was  be- 
lieved, the  people  might,  perhaps,  get  more  complete 
economic  control  as  well  as  control  of  political  matters. 
But  opponents  protested  that  such  an  arrangement  would 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN' 


247 


merely  be  a  reversion  to  a  more  primitive  and  less  good 
system,  tried  and  discarded  in  the  past. 

During  the  period  1867-1918  all  sorts  of  reforms  were 
carried  forward  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  body  of  the 
people  able  to  share  in  their  government  and  also  for  the 
bettering  of  their  condition.  In  18()7  Robert  Lowe  had 
said:  "We  must  now  educate  our  masters."  This  was 
undertaken  by  the  Liberals  who  came  into  power  under 
Gladstone  almost  immediately  after  Disraeli  had  carried 
the  second  Electoral  Reform  Law.  A  great  change  was 
made  in  1870.  Down  to  this  time  English  education,  except 
for  a  very  few  of  the  wealthy,  was  far  behind  what  existed 
in  Germany  or  the  United  States.  There  were  the  two 
old  universities  of  Oxford  and  Cambridge,  unrivalled  in 
beauty  and  ancient  charm,  but  giving  only  the  culture 
which  befitted  the  children  of  the  ruling  classes.  Beneath 
them  were  certain  "public  schools"  like  Eton  and  Rugby, 
where  also  sons  of  the  aristocrats  might  receive  splendid 
teaching  of  the  humanities  and  fine  training  in  the  develop- 
ment of  character.  But  this  was  by  far  the  best  part  of 
a  system  which  had  been  devised  principally  for  the  upper 
classes.  In  1870  there  were  thought  to  be  about  4,000,000 
children  of  school  age,  of  whom  only  half  attended  any 
school.  Of  these  2,000,000,  half  attended  schools  poorly 
organized  and  often  not  well  conducted.  The  rest  went 
to  schools  under  government  inspection  and  partly  sup- 
ported by  the  government  but  managed  by  the  Church 
of  England,  so  that  in  England,  as  in  France  and  in  Spain, 
a  considerable  part  of  the  education  remained  in  the  hands 
of  the  Church.  Several  small  reforms  had  already  been 
made,  but  it  was  evident  that  a  great  deal  was  yet  to  be 
done.  There  was  much  difference  of  opinion,  as  there 
was  in  similar  instances  in  most  European  countries. 
Some  believed  that  it  was  well  for  religious  teaching  to  be 
given;  others  that  education  ought  to  be  entirely  without 
religious  influence,  and  compulsory  and  free.     The  Edu- 


Improve- 
ment  of 
education 


Education  of 
the  children 
in  1870 


248 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Reform :  the 
Education 
Act  of  1870 


Social  and 

economic 

reforms 


cation  Act  of  1870  was  a  compromise,  as  has  usually  been 
the  case  in  England.  Existing  voluntary  schools  doing 
good  work  were  to  be  retained  and  get  more  assistance  from 
the  government,  and  they  might  continue  their  religious 
instruction.  Elsewhere  "board  schools"  were  to  be 
established,  supported  by  the  government,  by  the  local 
rates,  and  partly  by  fees  paid  by  the  parents  of  the  children 
attending.  In  them  no  religious  denominational  instruc- 
tion was  to  be  allowed.  This  reform  by  no  means  brought 
the  educational  system  of  Great  Britain  up  to  the  stand- 
ards of  Switzerland  and  the  German  Empire;  it  did  not 
make  education  entirely  free  and  compulsory,  and  it  left 
it  partly  under  denominational  control.  None  the  less, 
it  greatly  bettered  conditions  and  to  a  considerable  extent 
provided  education  free  of  cost  to  the  children.  Before 
the  end  of  the  century  four  fifths  of  the  children  went  to 
school.  The  work  was  carried  far  forward  in  1918  by  one 
of  the  great  reforms  of  the  period  of  the  war,  when  a  law 
was  passed  providing  that  all  children  between  five  and 
fourteen  years  must  go  to  school,  and  providing  that  the 
expense  of  education  should  be  divided  equally  between 
the  central  government  and  the  local  authorities. 

The  admission  of  the  lower  classes  to  the  electorate 
and  to  a  share  in  the  government  in  1867  and  1884  was 
not  followed  by  an  overturning  of  the  government,  such 
as  people  in  the  upper  classes  had  feared,  nor  by  any  ex- 
ceedingly radical  demands.  Nevertheless,  as  in  the  earlier 
part  of  the  century,  a  whole  series  of  reforms  was  gradually 
carried  out,  the  two  parties  vying  with  each  other  in  mak- 
ing the  changes.  The  Liberals  believed  that  they  ought 
to  be  made;  the  Conservatives  considered  them  inevitable 
and  believed  it  better  for  the  government  to  grant  them 
than  for  the  mass  of  the  people  to  compel  them.  Some 
of  the  changes  had  to  do  with  taking  away  privileges  from 
particular  classes.  In  1870  the  civil  service  was  reformed. 
Next  year  the  University  Tests  Act  practically  completed 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


249 


the  removal  of  tlic  religious  tests,  wliicli  before  liad  re- 
stricted the  privileges  of  the  great  universities  mostly  to 
members  of  the  Church  of  England.  Another  group  had 
to  do  with  bettering  economic  conditions  and  protecting 
labor.  In  the  period  1878-1901  factory  legislation  was 
extended  and  simplified;  and  during  the  same  time  laws 
were  passed  to  regulate  better  the  conditions  in  the  mines. 
The  state  socialism  of  Bismarck  had  put  the  German  Em- 
pire ahead  of  other  countries  for  a  while  in  the  improve- 
ment of  social  and  economic  conditions,  but  similar  work 
was  undertaken  also  in  the  United  Kingdom  when  the 
Liberal  Party  came  into  power  under  Sir  Henry  Campbell- 
Bannerman,  Mr.  Asquith,  and  IVIr.  Lloyd  George  in  1905. 
In  the  course  of  the  years  immediately  following  a  Work- 
ingmen's  Compensation  Act  (1906)  made  employers  liable 
to  pay  compensation  to  employees  injured  by  accident. 
An  Old  Age  Pension  Act  (1909)  provided  that  every  per- 
son over  seventy  years  of  age  with  an  income  of  less  than 
£31  10s.  should  receive  a  pension  from  the  State.  Long 
effort  had  been  needed  to  secure  this  law,  since  while  its 
advocates  asserted  that  it  would  make  happier  the  last 
years  of  deserving  unfortunates,  opponents  declared  that 
all  such  legislation  was  ruinous  since  it  tended  to  paup- 
erize people,  encouraging  them  to  rely  on  assistance  from 
the  State  rather  than  on  their  own  efforts.  In  1911  was 
passed  a  National  Insurance  Act  whicli  provided  insurance 
for  sickness  and  loss  of  employment,  the  funds  to  be  sub- 
scribed generally,  though  not  always,  by  the  employees, 
and  by  the  employers  and  the  State. 

Beginning  with  1824  a  series  of  statutes,  especially  the 
statute  of  1871,  gradually  legalized  the  trade  unions, 
which  workingmen  had  already  formed  for  protection  and 
advancement  of  their  interests,  and  in  order  to  raise  their 
wages,  but  which  the  State  long  continued  to  oppose.  In 
1901,  it  is  true,  the  House  of  Lords  declared,  in  the  Tuff 
Vale  Case,  that  members  of   trade   unions   were   liable 


Regulation 
of  industry 
anJ  labor 


Trade 
unions 


250  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

The  Taff  singly  and  collectively  for  the  acts  of  their  union.     This 

Vale  Case  ^.^^g  merely  corporate  responsibility  added  to  the  corporate 
privileges  which  unions  had  already  acquired;  but  it  was 
felt  by  many  that  workingmen's  unions  were  so  much 
weaker  than  the  powerful  employers,  and  so  much  more  in 
need  of  assistance,  that  they  needed  special  protection. 
Therefore  in  1906  the  Trades  Disputes  Act  gave  immunity 
to  trade-union  funds.  Actually,  however,  trade  unions 
were  becoming  exceedingly  powerful  in  Great  Britain. 
More  and  more  they  were  able  to  deal  as  equals  or  superiors 
with  the  employers,  and  cause  the  government  itself  to  heed 
their  wishes.  Memories  of  long  oppression  and  tyranny 
on  the  part  of  capitalists  and  employers  made  many 
leaders  of  the  workingmen  regard  all  employers  with  dis- 
like and  suspicion;  and  gradually  they  adopted  socialist 
ideas  and  began  to  hope  that  a  day  might  come  when 
capitalism  and  middle-class  employers  would  be  done 
away  with  completely.  Numerous  strikes  were  called,  it 
sometimes  seemed,  more  for  the  purpose  of  harassing  the 
employers  than  anything  else.  Particularly  did  the  doc- 
trine spread  among  British  workingmen  that  they  were 
made  to  work  too  many  hours  for  the  benefit  of  employers, 
that  thus  numerous  people  could  find  no  work  to  do,  and 
that  only  if  hours  were  reduced  and  production  restrained 
would  there  be  work  enough  for  them  all. 
The  Labor  As  Britain  became  a  completely  industriahzed  country 

Party  w\\h  its  artisans  composing  so  great  a  portion  of  the 

people,  leaders  aspired  to  found  a  Labor  Party,  to 
take  control  of  the  government  some  day  for  organized 
labor,  which  would  then  be  able  to  reconstruct  the  State. 
In  1893  an  Independent  Labor  Party  was  founded,  which 
proposed  to  have  the  government  bring  about  an  eight- 
hour  day  of  labor,  collective  ownership,  and  State  control 
of  railways,  shipping,  and  banks.  Most  of  the  British 
laborers  were  not  yet  ready  to  accept  socialistic  doctrines, 
and  they  did  not  give  this  party  their  support.     In  1906 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


251 


another  Labor  Party  was  formed.  It  became  one  of  the 
smaller  groups  in  the  House  of  Commons,  with  power 
increasing  as  time  went  on,  and  its  advocates  expecting 
it  to  be  the  dominant  party  in  the  future. 

Labor  disputes  became  constantly  more  bitter  and 
labor  leaders  more  aggressive  in  the  years  just  before  the 
war.  The  wiser  of  the  leaders  desired  nothing  more  than 
the  real  improvement  of  laboring  peoj)le;  but  it  was  often 
believed  that  the  numerous  harassing  strikes  and  refusal  to 
work  more  than  a  certain  amount  were  seriously  hindering 
production  and  putting  Britain  behind  in  industrial  com- 
petition with  Germany  and  the  United  States.  During 
the  Great  War  British  labor  gave  splendid  response  to  the 
needs  of  the  country,  the  unions  consenting  to  put  aside 
the  rules  which  they  had  made  for  their  protection.  But 
it  was  very  evident  that  they  expected  their  reward  to 
come  after  their  country  had  triumphed.  Some  of  them 
declared  that  then  the  State  must  take  over  the  mines  and 
the  railways  and  other  great  instruments  and  sources  of 
production  to  be  used  for  the  people  themselves,  and  that 
much  must  be  done  by  the  government  to  give  the  work- 
ers a  larger  share  in  the  goods  of  the  State.  In  1917  the 
British  Labor  Committee  issued  a  Report  in  which  it  de- 
clared that  there  must  be  democratic  control  of  all  the 
machinery  of  the  State,  and  that  the  system  of  private 
capitalists  must  yield  to  common  ovMiersliip  of  land  and 
capital  by  the  people.  At  the  end  of  the  struggle  the  pow- 
erful "Triple  Alliance"  of  miners,  transport  workers,  and 
railwaymen  was  strengthened,  and  the  organized  laborers 
of  the  country  drew  up  in  powerful  array  threatening  to 
enforce  their  wishes  by  "direct  action"  of  paralyzing 
strikes.  By  this  time  it  seemed  that  the  trade  unions  in 
Great  Britain,  as  in  some  other  countries,  were  no  longer 
struggling  so  much  for  the  protection  of  themselves  as  to 
enforce  the  special  interests  of  their  particular  class. 

Social  betterment  in  the  United  Kingdom  had  lagged 


Labor 
powerful 
and  aggres- 
sive 


Report  of 
the  British 
Labor  Com- 
mittee 


252 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Wealth  and 
poverty  in 
Great 
Britain 


The  land 
owned  by 
a  few 
aristocrats 


far  behind  the  wishes  of  enhghtened  leaders  hke  Mr. 
Lloyd  George,  and  the  desires  of  the  sociahst  and  radical 
teachers.  The  condition  of  a  great  part  of  the  people 
seemed  far  less  good  than  that  of  the  Germans,  protected 
by  their  vigorous  and  paternal  government,  or  of  the  in- 
habitants of  the  United  States  and  some  of  the  British 
dominions,  where  new  lands  were  being  opened  up  and 
great  natural  resources  made  use  of.  The  evils  of  in- 
dustrialism had  by  no  means  yet  disappeared.  For  its 
size  Britain  was  the  wealthiest  country  in  the  world,  but 
tliis  wealth  was  largely  concentrated  in  the  hands  of  a  few. 
It  was  estimated  that  half  of  the  national  income  went  to 
12  per  cent,  of  the  population,  that  all  the  rest  of  the  peo- 
ple were  poor,  and  that  in  some  communities  a  third  of 
them  were  always  on  the  verge  of  starvation.  Before 
1914  travellers  were  struck  by  the  appalling  misery  of  the 
slums  of  Glasgow  and  the  dreadful  poverty  of  wide  areas 
about  the  Whitechapel  district  in  London.  To  some 
extent  it  was  against  such  conditions  that  the  British 
trade  unions  were  strugghng;  and  their  ignorant,  ob- 
stinate, and  arbitrary  methods  were  often  to  be  explained 
and  excused  because  of  the  long-standing  and  terrible  evils 
which  they  confronted. 

Most  of  the  land  had  long  since  come  into  the  possession 
of  a  few  great  owners.  In  England  two  thirds  of  the  soil 
was  owned  by  10,000  persons,  and  almost  all  of  Scotland 
by  1,700  persons;  many  of  the  large  estates  being  en- 
tailed, so  that  they  could  not  easily  be  alienated  or  divided, 
and  so  that  usually  they  passed  intact  from  one  generation 
to  another.  To  a  considerable  extent  Britain  was  a 
country  of  beautiful  parks  and  estates,  with  picturesque 
old  villages,  delightful  to  the  tourist's  eye,  though  often 
antiquated,  unsanitary,  and  not  sufficient  for  the  needs 
of  the  rural  population.  The  agricultural  laborers  were 
crowded  off  the  land,  or  else  entirely  at  the  mercy  of 
powerful   landowners.     At   the  other  extreme  were  the 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


253 


great  landed  proprietors,  with  large  fortunes  and  exten- 
sive investments,  taxed  liglitly  on  their  lands,  wealthy, 
powerful,  constituting — far  more  than  in  PVance  and  as 
much  as  in  Germany — an  aristocratic  caste  above  the 
other  inhabitants.  They  completely  dominated  fashion- 
able and  social  life;  they  filled  many  of  the  imi>ortant 
places  in  the  government;  and  some  of  them  composed 
the  House  of  Lords.  Generally  they  had  been  wise  and 
careful,  and  had  contributed  not  a  little  to  the  welfare 
of  the  country;  and  it  was  partly  for  these  reasons  that 
they  had  been  able  to  retain  so  much  of  their  position 
and  their  power.  But  many  Englishmen  had  long  thought 
it  a  misfortune  that  their  agriculture  should  so  far  decline 
and  their  rural  population  diminish;  and  there  had  long 
been  agitation,  which  increased  during  the  war,  for  the 
government  in  some  way  to  compel  the  breaking  up  of 
the  great  estates  and  to  settle  part  of  the  population  upon 
them. 

It  was  partly  the  cost  of  the  social  legislation,  which  was 
sought  and  which  was  being  carried  through,  that  led  to 
one  of  the  greatest  revolutions  in  British  government  for 
generations.  This  was  the  virtual  taking  away  of  the 
power  of  the  House  of  Lords  by  the  Parliament  Act  of 
1911.  More  money  was  needed  by  the  government, 
and  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  chancellor  of  the  exchequer,  now 
proposed  to  increase  the  budget  partly  by  increased  in- 
come taxes  and  also  by  heavy  taxation  on  the  unearned 
increment  of  land  values,  that  is,  where  the  value  of  un- 
occupied or  unimproved  land  was  increased  not  through 
anything  done  by  the  owner  but  by  the  mere  increase 
in  population  or  surrounding  values.  Thus,  he  proposed 
to  get  the  larger  amounts  of  money  needed  by  higher 
taxes  on  the  possessions  of  the  wealth}';  but  his  scheme  was 
denounced  as  striking  at  the  very  security'  of  property; 
and  when  the  provision  passed  the  House  of  Commons  at 
the  end  of  1909  it  was  at  once  rejected  by  the  Lords. 


The  nobility 
in  Britain 


The  House 
of  Lords 
and  the 
budget 


254 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  House 
of  Lords 
and  the 
House  of 
Commons 


Creation  of 
new  peers 


^Mien  parliament  was  now  dissolved  and  a  new  election 
held  the  issue  before  the  country  was  the  "veto  power"  of 
the  Upper  House.  Parliament  in  the  beginning  had  been 
an  assembly  of  estates,  as  the  States  General  continued 
to  be  in  France,  which  after  a  while  developed  into  a  body 
of  two  houses.  Its  principal  functions  were  advisory 
and  judicial,  and  it  long  continued  to  be  known  as  the 
"  High  Court  of  Parhament."  In  course  of  time,  however, 
the  principal  business  of  parliament  came  to  be  the 
passing  of  legislation  and  the  appropriation  of  money. 
In  the  passing  of  bills  it  was  necessary  that  both 
houses  give  their  consent,  nor  could  a  bill  become  law  if 
either  the  Lords  or  the  Commons  refused.  During  the 
eighteenth  century  the  principle  was  equally  well  estab- 
lished that  bills  for  the  appropriation  of  money  were  to 
originate  in  the  Commons  and  not  to  be  altered  by  the 
Lords.  In  other  respects,  however,  the  House  of  Lords 
continued  to  have  the  veto  power  and  used  it  not  infre- 
quently. On  several  important  occasions  there  had  been 
bitter  disputes  between  the  two  Houses,  and  in  two  mem- 
orable instances  the  government  had  employed  a  particular 
device  to  overcome  the  opposition  of  the  Lords.  In 
1711  the  government  wished  to  have  the  approval  of  par- 
hament for  the  Treaty  of  Utrecht  which  had  just  been 
negotiated.  It  was  easy  to  get  such  approval  from  the 
Commons,  but  there  was  a  majority  opposing  in  the 
Lords.  Thereupon  Queen  Anne  announced  the  creation 
of  twelve  new  peers,  whose  coming  into  the  House  of  Lords 
made  a  majority  favorable  to  the  measure,  which  was  then 
approved.  Similarly  in  1830  and  1831  the  Lords  vetoed 
the  bill  for  electoral  reform,  which  the  Commons  had 
passed,  and  which  a  majority  of  the  people  wanted.  There 
was  no  ordinary  way  by  which  this  opposition  could  be 
removed,  since  the  Lords  held  their  seats  by  hereditary 
title,  but  again  the  government  made  ready  to  create  a 
large  number  of  Whig  peers  who  would  ensure  the  passage 


ment  Law  of 
1911 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  255 

of  the  bill.  Under  this  threat  the  Lords  jdelded,  and  the 
Reform  Bill  of  1832  became  law.  Now  in  1910,  after  the 
Lords  had  rejected  the  Finance  Bill,  parliament  was  dis- 
solved and  elections  held  on  the  issue  of  abolishing  the  veto 
power  of  the  Lords.  The  Liberals  won  and  brought  for- 
ward such  a  bill,  which  the  Lords  rejected.  Again  parlia- 
ment was  dissolved  and  the  issue  bitterly  contested  in 
general  elections,  and  again  the  Liberals  triumphed. 
Early  in  1911  it  was  announced  that  a  sufficient  number 
of  new  peers  would  be  created  to  carry  tJie  bill.  Then 
the  House  of  Lords  yielded  and  the  bill  was  enacted  into 
law. 

;  This  Parhament  Law  of  1911  pro\T[ded  that  the  Lords  The  Parlia- 
should  have  no  power  whatever  to  reject  any  money  bill, 
and  that  any  other  measure  passing  the  Commons  in  three 
successive  sessions  within  a  period  of  not  less  tJian  two 
years  should  become  law  despite  the  Lords'  veto.  Thus 
the  constitution  of  parliament  was  fundamentally  altered. 
For  a  long  time  the  Lords  had  been  more  powerful  and 
important  than  the  Commons,  but  since  the  eighteenth 
century  the  Commons  had  been  getting  an  ascendancy 
greater  and  greater.  None  the  less,  the  Lords  might  still 
oppose  and  successfully  obstruct.  Now  substantially 
this  power  was  taken  away  from  them,  and  only  that 
part  of  parliament  which  was  elected  by  the  people  re- 
mained w^ith  great  influence  in  the  State.  According 
to  the  law  the  king  still  possessed  the  right  to  veto  a  bill; 
but  no  sovereign  had  done  this  since  1707,  and  actually 
this  prerogative  had  been  completely  lost.  It  should  be  The  Peerage 
said  that  in  1719  a  bill  had  nearlj^  passed  parliament  by  Bill  of  1719 
which  the  government  would  have  lost  the  right  to  create 
new  peers.  Had  this  taken  place,  neither  the  Reform  Law 
of  1832  nor  the  Parliament  Act  of  1911  could  have  been 
enacted  without  a  revolution,  since  it  was  only  upon  the 
threat  of  creating  new  peers  that  the  House  of  Lords  had 
yielded  and  surrendered  its  power.     It  is  probable  that 


256 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Irish 
Question 


Conquest 
of  Ireland 
by  the 
English 


the  Upper  House  of  the  English  parhament  will  presently 
be  reconstituted  on  a  more  modern  basis.  At  present  its 
power  is  far  less  than  that  of  the  American  Senate,  which, 
since  1913,  has  been  made  directly  dependent  on  the 
people.  In  1911,  also,  by  this  same  law,  the  maximum 
duration  of  a  parhament  was  fixed  at  five  years,  instead 
of  seven  years,  as  previously  since  1716.  In  the  same 
year  also  tlie  Commons  voted  to  pay  their  members, 
something  once  done,  but  not  done  for  a  long  while. 

The  struggle  over  the  power  of  the  House  of  Lords  was 
intimately  connected  with  the  long  contest  for  Irish  Home 
Rule;  and  when  the  veto  was  taken  from  the  Lords  it 
seemed  for  the  moment  that  the  Irish  Question  was 
nearer  settlement  than  it  had  ever  been  in  the  past.  In 
the  midst  of  the  great  success  that  had  come  to  England 
and  the  British  Empire  in  the  nineteenth  century  Ireland 
was  the  principal  failure.  Its  story  was  an  old  story  of 
tragedy  and  misfortune  and  woe.  The  errors  of  times  past 
had  been  so  great,  and  the  enmities  which  had  resulted  were 
so  lasting,  that  the  settlement  of  the  Irish  Question  had 
baffled  generations  of  statesmen  and  was  now  one  of  the 
most  difficult  of  all  the  problems  for  which  Britain  must 
find  a  solution. 

Ireland  in  the  early  ages  was  inhabited  by  Celtic  people 
much  hke  those  in  Britain.  As  a  result  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
conquest  the  Brythonic  Celts  disappeared  from  most  of 
what  then  became  England,  but  across  in  Erin,  the  other 
island,  the  Goidelic  Celts  kept  possession  of  the  country 
and  developed  in  some  places  considerable  culture.  Like 
the  Anglo-Saxons  in  England,  the  Celts  in  Ireland  failed 
to  develop  a  nation  and  remained  divided  in  tribes  or 
small  kingdoms;  and  they  continued  thus  disunited  long 
after  the  conquest  of  England  by  the  Normans  had  made 
the  English  a  nation  and  given  to  England  a  strong  central 
government.  Thus  they  fell  an  easy  prey  to  invaders, 
first  the  Danes,  then  Norman  adventurers  from  England, 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


257 


and  finally  the  English  Government  itself;  but  for  a  long 
time  they  were  never  completely  conf(iierefl.  The  in- 
vaders held  the  east  coast  and  llie  natives  held  the  rest  of 
the  country.  The  Celts  could  iiol  drive  llic  intruders 
out;  the  invaders  could  not  make  a  complete  con((uest, 
but  were  able  to  prevent  the  better  development  of  Irish 
civilization  and  the  establishment  of  an  Irish  nation.  In 
the  sixteenth  century,  at  a  time  when  Englishmen  were 
becoming  Protestants  and  Irishmen  were  clinging  to  the 
old  Catholic  faith,  the  English  began  a  systematic  reduc- 
tion of  the  country,  and  in  the  course  of  long  and  terribly 
destructive  wars,  during  which  a  great  many  of  the  Irish 
perished  by  starvation  and  the  sword,  the  country  was 
completely  conquered  and  reduced  to  a  state  of  subjection. 

By  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  this  process  was 
complete.  Ireland  was  now  treated  as  a  conc[uest  of  the 
British  crown,  much  as  a  dependent  colony.  Most  of  the 
land  was  taken  from  the  Irish  proprietors  and  given  to 
English  landlords.  All  the  privileges  and  power  were 
restricted  to  members  of  the  Anglican  Church  of  Ire- 
land, and  the  native  Irish  were  kept  under  penal  laws 
because  of  their  Catholic  faith.  In  a  few  generations 
most  of  the  Irish  natives,  many  of  whom  continued  to 
speak  their  Celtic  tongue  and  love  the  old  Celtic  tribal 
law,  were  reduced  virtually  to  the  position  of  serfs.  And 
even  the  English  and  Scottish  colonists  in  the  country, 
a  great  many  of  whom  were  in  the  northern  part,  in  the 
province  of  Ulster,  were  not  allowed  to  develop  much 
industry  or  commerce,  but  were  put  under  the  same  sort  of 
economic  restrictions  as  those  which  later  on  contributed 
to  cause  the  American  colonies  to  rebel  and  fight  for  in- 
dependence. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Thirteen 
Colonies  of  Britain  in  America  did  win  their  independence; 
but  Ireland  was  too  close  to  Great  Britain  to  break  away. 
Nevertheless,  the  British  Government  made  some  con- 


The  con- 
quest long 
incomplete 


Subjection 
of  the 
Irish 


The  Act  of 
Union,  1800 


258 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Ireland 
joined  to 
Great  Brit- 
ain: the 

United 
Kingdom 


The  Great 
Famine 
and  emigra- 
tion 


cessions.  During  the  period  1782-1800  Ireland  was 
permitted  to  have  a  separate  parhament,  and  during  this 
era  considerable  prosperity  came  to  some  of  the  people. 
It  was  not  long,  however,  before  trouble  developed. 
Catholics  and  Protestants  quarreled;  and  some  of  the 
Irish,  desiring  to  separate  completely  from  Great  Brit- 
ain, sought  the  aid  of  the  French.  This  was  in  the 
midst  of  the  great  struggle  with  Napoleon,  and  so  grave 
was  the  situation  that  Pitt,  the  British  prime  minister, 
resolved  to  end  the  danger  by  binding  Ireland  to  Britain 
more  closely  than  ever  before.  Accordingly,  in  1800, 
an  Act  of  Union  was  passed  which  joined  Ireland  to 
Great  Britain  in  the  United  Kingdom  in  much  the  same 
way  that  Scotland  and  England  had  been  united  to  form 
Great  Britain  in  1707.  There  was  now  to  be  one  parlia- 
ment for  the  United  Kingdom,  in  which  the  Irish  were 
to  have  representatives  just  as  were  the  English  and  the 
Scots.  This  had  worked  very  well  for  the  Scots;  but 
it  failed  to  satisfy  the  Irish,  who  after  a  while  began 
to  try  to  undo  it.  The  failure  was  owing  to  the  fact  that 
most  of  the  Irish  were  still  obliged  to  make  their  living  by 
working  on  some  plot  of  ground  for  which  they  paid  high 
rent  to  an  English  landlord,  and  because  the  Catholics  of 
Ireland,  who  were  three  fourths  of  the  population,  were 
still  partly  disfranchised  and  subjected  to  discrimination 
because  of  their  faith.  Nothing  would  have  done  more  to 
content  them  than  complete  Catholic  emancipation,  but 
largely  owing  to  the  obstinacy  of  George  III  this  was  not 
given  until  1829,  by  which  time  it  was  too  late  to  make 
Irishmen  feel  any  gratitude  for  it. 

Throughout  all  this  time  population  was  increasing 
rapidly,  and  as  these  people  could  only  be  supported  by 
agriculture,  the  struggle  for  existence  on  the  limited 
amount  of  cultivable  land  became  more  and  more  terrible, 
and  the  danger  from  starvation  always  greater.  The 
main  support  of  the  people  was  the  potato,  but  in  1846 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


259 


the  potato  crop  Wcis  a  total  failure,  and  for  three  years 
afterward  there  were  famine  and  pestilence  and  appalling 
misery  in  the  land.  A  half  million  or  more  people  perished 
of  starvation,  and  a  million  and  a  half  others  were  stricken 
with  the  fever  that  followed.  From  this  disaster  Ireland 
never  recovered.  When  the  famine  was  past,  those  who 
could  began  leaving  the  country,  most  of  them  to  settle 
in  the  United  States,  where  they  lauglit  to  their  children 
and  their  children's  children  hatred  of  the  England 
which,  they  said,  had  caused  their  ruin.  The  popula- 
tion of  Ireland  was  about  5,000,000  in  1801.  By  1841  it 
was  more  than  8,000,000.  After  1846  it  rapidly  declined, 
and  at  the  beginning  of  the  twxmtieth  century  it  had 
fallen  to  little  more  than  4,000,000.  The  best  people 
had  gone  to  America,  as  in  the  eighteenth  century  they 
had  gone  away  to  France.  Those  who  remained  in  Ire- 
land, assisted  often  by  their  brethren  in  the  United  States, 
continued  to  hate  England  and  hope  for  the  day  of  her 
destruction,  which  would,  they  thought,  be  the  day  of 
deliverance  for  them. 

Bad  as  these  conditions  were,  they  had  arisen  not  from 
any  special  wickedness  of  Englishmen,  but  as  a  result  of 
methods  that  were  everywhere  applied  in  times  past, 
and  because  of  circumstances  particularly  unhappy. 
These  conditions  were  changed  all  too  slowly.  But  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  a  great  alteration 
came  to  pass.  The  Irish  were  able  to  make  their  protests 
and  resistance  more  troublesome  and  much  more  effective. 
Steadily  the  people  of  Britain  had  been  becoming  more 
humane  and  more  sensitive  to  wrong  and  the  suffering 
about  them.  Moreover,  Britain  was  slowly  being  trans- 
formed into  a  democracy,  with  the  power  of  the  govern- 
ment increasingly  in  the  hands  of  the  people.  And  just 
as  in  the  nineteenth  century  a  great  series  of  reforms  had 
been  carried  out  for  the  betterment  of  the  lot  of  the  mass 
of  the  people  in  Britain,  so,  after  a  while,  as  the  people  of 


Failure  of 
the  potato 
crop 


England  and 
Ireland 


260 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Reforms  in 
Ireland 


The  Land 
Purchase 
Acts 


Britain  and  their  leaders  understood  more  clearly  the  con- 
ditions in  Ireland,  they  turned  themselves  to  the  long  and 
difficult  task  of  improving  them  and  undoing  the  wrongs 
which  had  once  been  committed. 

Roman  Catholics  had  been  emancipated  in  1829,  but 
the  work  of  completing  the  removal  of  religious  dis- 
crimination was  effected  in  1869  by  the  disestablish- 
ment of  the  Church  of  Ireland,  the  Protestant  Church 
which  the  British  Government  had  long  before  established 
and  endowed  with  property,  and  which  had  until  recently 
been  supported  with  tithes  paid  by  the  Catholic  Irish. 
Next,  urged  on  by  violent  agitation  and  the  savage  law- 
lessness of  some  of  the  Irish,  the  government  gave  its 
attention  to  the  question  of  the  land.  Beginning  with 
1870  a  series  of  acts  was  passed  by  which  Irish  tenants 
were  protected  in  their  tenures,  and  assured  some  compen- 
sation for  their  improvements  made  on  land  while  it 
had  been  in  their  possession;  and  presently  the  govern- 
ment itself  took  measures  to  see  that  they  were  not  made 
to  pay  excessive  rents.  More  important  still,  another 
series  of  laws,  passed  in  the  last  quarter  of  the  century, 
gave  government  assistance  to  the  peasants  so  that  they 
might  buy  their  lands  and  become  owners  themselves. 
They  were  to  repay  the  government,  with  moderate  in- 
terest, in  small  payments  over  a  long  period  of  time,  the 
terms  being  so  generously  arranged  that  presently  it  was 
cheaper  for  an  Irishman  to  buy  his  land  than  it  was  to 
pay  rent.  By  1910  half  of  the  island  was  in  possession  of 
small  holders,  who  were  slowly  paying  the  government; 
and  it  was  evident  that  in  the  course  of  time  Ireland  would 
be  owned  by  peasant  proprietors  more  than  almost 
any  other  country.  Slowly  but  surely  now  the  people 
were  laying  the  foundation  for  considerable  prosperity. 
Further  progress  would  lie  in  setting  up  again,  if  modern 
conditions  made  that  possible,  the  old  commerce  and  in- 
dustry of  the  island. 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  2G1 

But  Irishmen  were  not  yet  .sali.sfi(«(l.  They  remained  The  strug- 
discontented  with  the  government  that  made  them  part  gle  for  Home 
of  the  United  Kingdom.  Some  of  tliem  wished  complete 
independence  and  separation,  like  the  adherents  of  Young 
Ireland  who  arose  about  1840,  and  like  the  Fenians  who 
were  active  after  1860.  But  most  of  the  people  followed 
more  conservative  leaders.  About  1870  the  Home  Rule 
movement  began  under  Isaac  Butt,  and  was  soon  carried 
forward  by  Parnell.  This  was  designed  to  secure  Irish 
self-government  for  an  Ireland  which  would  nevertheless 
continue  in  the  United  Kingdom,  joined  with  Great 
Britain.  INIost  of  the  people  in  Britain,  however,  were 
opposed  even  to  this  partial  separation.  Home  Rule  was 
advocated  by  the  Liberal  Party  under  Gladstone  in  1886 
and  in  1893;  but  both  times  the  })ill  that  was  introduced 
into  parliament  failed  to  be  enacted  as  a  law.  For  some 
years  nothing  further  was  accomplished,  but  the  Irish 
under  their  new  leader,  John  Redmond,  continued  their 
efforts.  The  great  opportunity  came  when  the  Lib- 
eral Party  under  Asquith  and  Lloyd  George  were  try- 
ing to  bring  about  their  social  reforms.  They  soon 
needed  all  the  support  in  parliament  that  they  could 
get.  The  Irish  Nationalist  members  were  willing  to  vote 
with  them  on  condition  that,  in  return,  a  Home  Rule 
bill  should  be  passed.  The  Liberals  were  the  more 
willing  to  do  this  since  many  of  them  favored  Irish  self- 
government.  Thus  it  was  by  Irish  support  that  the  Par- 
liament Act  of  1911  was  finally  put  through;  and  in  the 
following  year  a  third  Home  Rule  Bill  was  brought  into 
parliament. 

A  memorable  struggle  followed.     It  was  known  that     The  Third 
the  House  of  Lords  would  refuse  to  sanction  such  a  meas-     Home  Rule 
ure,  but  no  longer  could  the  Lords  do  more  than  delay     ^^^'  passed 
the  passage  of  any  measure.     The  Home  Rule  Bill  of  191'-2, 
which  satisfied   many   of   the  Irish   people,   was   passed 
again  by  the  Commons  in  1913  and  1914,  in  spite  of  the 


pn  REPUBUCAN 

r~n  UNIONIST  .  ^-^^U-^SS  x^r^-^^'% 

E23  NATIONALIST  a^JM  ■   /'•}^v;^Sx^ntlonde 

^^  /•.■•.■•r-.-.\'^^„LONDOKJ:iERRY 

X^  x.;..-..;-'  ■  ■ 

'^^     .\,FEKkANAGH    -7^    ,.     ^k^xVh\_ _ 

CX  "^^S-*       \     ^.^  QUEENS    CO,    ^  al  \^*    '     ' 

■  Limerick;  '^  \       "'^  ■       'o>'  r 

/LIMERICK''"-'"         .       "^  ,        ■  'n      W.,       i''       •> 

"^         V  ^  •  '}-9  A-t.  E  p.  F  0   R , 

^      .  _^  :.  Cork°^^fe3    _^, 

JueetfstowD 


Scale  of  Miles 
0    5  10  15  20  25  30 


:Nt8At  OfiAfT.NC  ( 


11.    IRELAND:  SHOWING  THE  SINN  FEIN  AREAS  IN  1918,  AND 
THE  UNIONIST  AREAS  IN  ULSTER 

262 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  263 

veto  of  the  Lords,  and  was  on  the  point  of  becoming  law 
when  the  Great  AVar  broke  out. 

Meanwhile,  however,  very  serious  opposition  had  Ulster 
developed  from  a  large  part  of  the  inhabitants  of  Ulster, 
the  northern  province,  partly  peopled  by  Protestant  im- 
migrants from  England  and  Scotland,  who  declared  that 
they  would  under  no  circumstances  permit  themselves  to 
be  separated  from  the  government  of  the  United  King- 
dom. They  said  that  they  feared  religious  and  economic 
oppression  from  the  Catholic  majority  in  Ireland  if  Home 
Rule  were  established  over  them ;  and  they  proclaimed  that 
they  would  resist  such  separation  by  force.  The  Great 
War  put  an  end  to  the  question  for  a  while,  the  Home 
Rule  Bill  being  passed,  but  the  law  suspended  for  the 
duration  of  the  conflict. 

It  was  most  unfortunate  that  this  question  had  not  been  Sinn  Fein 
completely  settled  long  before,  since  events  were  now 
to  show  that  it  was  almost  too  late  to  undertake  any  settle- 
ment at  all.  For  some  time  there  had  been  coming  into 
greater  prominence  a  group  of  Irishmen  who  desired  to 
revive  the  Celtic  literature  and  character  of  the  past.  In 
1893  they  had  founded  the  Gaelic  League.  From  this 
had  come  a  great  deal  of  excellent  writing  in  the  so-called 
Irish  Literary  Revival,  and  also  some  attempt  to  revive 
the  use  of  the  Celtic  tongue,  which  by  the  beginning  of 
the  twentieth  century  had  almost  come  to  an  end  in  the 
island.  This  movement  went  further  under  the  guid- 
ance of  men  whose  motto  was  Sinn  Fein  (We  ourselves), 
who  wished  to  get  complete  political  independence  for 
Ireland.  In  1904,  under  the  leadership  of  Arthur  Griffith 
and  others,  they  established  the  Society  of  Sinn  Fein. 
They  endeavored  to  teach  the  Irish  people  to  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  British  government  in  Ireland. 

The  spirit  of  these  people  and  of  other  radicals  in  Ire-     Ireland  and 
land  was  greatly   stirred  by  the  mighty  changes  of  the     Britain 
war.     In  April,  1916,  some  of  them  suddenly  rose  in  re- 


264 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

Rebellion 
of  1916 


An  Irish  Re- 
public pro- 
claimed, 
1919 


bellion  in  Dublin.  The  insurrection  was  quickly  crushed 
and  the  rebels  sternly  punished,  but  large  results  followed. 
The  Irish  people  had  not  yet  received  the  Home  Rule 
and  self-government  they  had  so  long  sought  for,  and 
they  felt  now  little  disposed  to  make  allowance  for  the  dif- 
culties  in  which  the  British  Government  found  itself  during 
the  struggle  of  the  nations.  When  the  government  ruled 
with  firmness  it  alienated  most  of  the  people;  when  it  tried 
leniency  they  merely  turned  to  the  leadership  of  Sinn  Fein. 
Many  of  them  now  lost  their  desire  for  Home  Rule,  and 
hoped  that  soon  under  Sinn  Fein  they  would  get  complete 
independence.  This  the  people  of  Britain  would  in  no  wise 
consider,  since  for  hundreds  of  years  rulers  and  statesmen 
had  been  trying  to  bring  about  the  union  of  the  British 
Isles,  and  also  because  the  geographical  position  of  Ireland 
was  such  that  she  could  control  the  principal  lines  of  com- 
munication from  Great  Britain  over  the  seas  to  the  sources 
of  her  raw  materials  and  her  food.  If  an  independent 
Ireland  were  ever  hostile  to  Great  Britain  in  war,  or  if  she 
got  into  the  enemy's  hands,  then  the  British  might  be 
starved  into  surrender  and  their  empire  destroyed. 

By  1917  the  people  of  Britain  were  quite  willing 
to  have  Irishmen  govern  themselves  in  domestic  matters, 
but  they  insisted  that  Ireland  should  continue  to  be 
united  with  Great  Britain  and  under  the  control  of  a 
central  government  in  the  matters  which  affected  them  all. 
Mr.  Lloyd  George,  who  had  become  the  prime  minister, 
called  an  Irish  Convention  to  settle  a  scheme  of  Irish  self- 
government,  but  no  agreement  could  be  reached  that 
was  satisfactory  to  either  of  the  extreme  parties,  the 
Ulster  Unionists  or  Sinn  Fein.  Most  of  the  Protestants 
of  Ulster  wanted  no  Home  Rule,  and  the  adherents  of  Sinn 
Fein  sought  independence.  At  the  end  of  the  war,  when 
a  general  election  was  held  in  the  United  Kingdom,  Sinn 
Fein  won  a  sweeping  victory  in  Ireland,  electing  three 
fourths  of  the  representatives  chosen.     They  announced 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN 


265 


that  they  would  not  sit  in  the  parh'ament  at  Westminster, 
and  early  in  1919  proclaimed  a  republic,  appealing  to 
America  and  the  Peace  Conference  at  Paris  to  gi\'e  them 
assistance.  At  first  the  resistance  to  British  authority 
was  passive,  but  soon  an  active  rebellion  was  raging,  car- 
ried on  by  guerilla  methods.  After  the  extreme  passions 
of  the  period  have  subsided  it  is  probable  that  the  Irish 
will  have  self-government  satisfactory  to  them,  yet,  in  out- 
side affairs,  retaining  their  union  with  Great  Britain. 

The  foreign  relations  of  Great  Britain  during  this  period 
are  best  related  in  other  connections.  Down  to  about 
1900  she  strove  to  stand  aloof  as  much  as  possible  from 
continental  affairs.  Her  interests  were  principally  im- 
perial and  colonial:  the  protection  of  the  colonies  which 
she  had  already  acquired,  and,  from  time  to  time,  the 
acquiring  of  new  ones.  For  this  a  strong  navy  rather 
than  a  strong  army  was  necessary,  and  so  Britain  did  not 
come  into  rivalry  with  great  military  powers  like  Austria- 
Hungary  and  the  German  Empire,  but  with  those,  like 
France  and  Russia,  whose  interests  were  also  colonial  and 
naval,  and  whose  ambition  it  was  to  extend  territorial 
possessions.  All  through  the  nineteenth  century  there 
was  fear  that  Russia  might  expand  down  through  the 
Balkans  and  along  the  Black  Sea  until  Constantinople 
was  obtained,  or  that  she  might  push  southward  from 
Turkestan  until  British  control  of  India  was  endangered. 
So  it  was  that  in  1878,  during  the  Russo-Turkish  War, 
Britain  made  ready  to  oppose  Russia  as  she  had  done 
before  in  the  Crimean  War;  and  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin, 
as  before  at  the  Congress  of  Paris,  she  succeeded  in  hold- 
ing Russia  back.  ]\Iore  acute  was  the  rivalry  with  France, 
the  old  enemy  with  whom  in  the  past  England  had  carried 
on  so  many  wars.  With  France  there  had  been  good  re- 
lations after  the  overthrow  of  Napoleon  I.  But  follow- 
ing the  establishment  of  the  Third  Republic,  when  French- 
men turned  from  Europe  to  build  up  a  great  colonial 


Foreign 
relations 


Rivalry  with 
Russia  and 
with  France 


266  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

empire  again,  and  when  in  furthering  this  they  developed 
strong  naval  power,  Britain  became  cold  and  suspicious. 
Fashoda  The  rivalry  culminated  in   1898,   when  British  moving 

southward  from  Egj'pt  met  Frenchmen  moving  eastward 
in  the  Sudan,  at  Fashoda.  The  two  nations  came  to  the 
very  brink  of  war,  which  was  only  avoided  through  sur- 
render by  France.  Thereafter  conditions  became  better 
and  1898  was  seen  to  have  been  a  great  turning-point. 
Hitherto  Germany  and  England  had  had  few  conflicting 
interests.  While  the  most  dangerous  opponents  of  Britain 
seemed  to  be  Russia  and  France,  the  partners  in  the  Dual 
Alliance,  there  w^ere  many  ties  between  Germany  and 
England.  England  had  been  friendly  to  the  Triple  Alli- 
ance. In  1887  she  had  made  with  Austria-Hungary  and 
Italy  an  agreement  concerning  the  Mediterranean.  In 
1898  it  seemed  for  a  moment  that  Germany  and  Britain 
might  come  together  in  a  common  agreement.  But  a 
great  revolution  in  diplomatic  affairs  now  took  place. 
In  less  than  a  decade  Britain  regarded  the  German  Empire 
as  her  most  formidable  and  dangerous  rival,  and  helped 
to  form  the  Triple  Entente  with  Russia  and  France. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  R.  H.  Gretton,  A  Modern  History  of  the  English 
People,  1880-1910,  2  vols.  (2d  ed.  1913),  liberal;  Sir  Spencer 
'SJVa\po\e,History  of  Twenty-Five  Years,  1856-1880,  4  vols.  (1904- 
8),  moderate  Liberal;  Paul  Mantoux,  A  travers  V Angleterre 
Contemporaine  (1909). 

Biographies  and  memoirs:  Sir  Sidney  Lee,  Queen  Victoria: 
a  Biography  (1903);  Edward  Legge,  King  Edward  in  His  True 
Colors  (1913),  More  about  King  Edward  (1913);  Alexander 
Mackintosh,  Joseph  Chamberlain  (ed.  1914);  Winston  Churchill, 
Lord  Randolph  Churchill,  2  vols.  (1906);  Stephen  Gwynn  and 
Gertrude  M.  Tuckwell,  The  Life  of  the  Rt.  Hon.  Sir  Charles  W. 
Dilke,  2  vols.  (1917);  W.  F.  Monypenny,  Life  of  Benjamin  Dis- 
raeli, Earl  of  Beaconsfield,  2  vols.  (1910-12),  continued  by 
G.  E.  Buckle,  4  vols.  (1914-20);  Harold  Spender,  The  Prime 
Minister  [Mr.  Lloyd  George],  (1920);  John  (Viscount)  Morley, 


DEMOCRATIC    BRITAIN  2G7 

The  Life  nf  William  Eirart  Gladstone,  'i  vols.  (1903),  acliniraljle; 
Sir  George  Arthur,  Life  of  Lord  Kitchener,  3  vols.  (1920; ;  John 
(Viscount)  Morley,  Recollections,  2  vols.  (1917);  R.  B.  O'Brien, 
Life  of  Charles-  Stewart  Parnell,  3  vols.  (1898) ;  TI.  D.  Traill,  Mar- 
quis of  SalLsbnnj  (1891);  Mrs.  IIunii)hry  Ward,  A  Writer's 
Recollections,  2  vols,  (1918),  and  Lytton  Strachey,  Eminent 
Victorians  (1919),  brilliant  and  striking  studies. 

Social  and  economic:  C.  J.  H.  Hayes,  British  Social  Politics 
(1913),  documents;  Graham  Balfour,  The  Educational  System  of 
Great  Britain  and  Ireland  (2d  ed.  1903);  W.  L.  Blease,  The 
Emancipation  of  English  Women  (ed.  1913);  Charles  Booth, 
editor.  Life  and  Labour  of  the  People  in  London,  17  vols.  (1892- 
1903),  containing  a  vast  amount  of  information  about  poverty 
and  the  condition  of  the  working  class;  Frederic  Keeling, 
Child  Labour  in  the  United  Kingdom  (1914);  R.  E.  Prothero, 
English  Farming  Past  and  Present  (1912) ;  The  Report  of  the  Land 
Enquiry  Committee,  A.  H.  Dyke  Acland  (chairman),  2  vols. 
(1914);  A.  R.  Wallace,  Land  Nationalization  (1882);  Sidney 
and  Beatrice  W^ebb,  A  Constitution  for  the  Socialist  Common- 
wealth of  Great  Britain  (1920). 

The  Irish  Question:  for  a  general  account,  E.  R.  Turner, 
Ireland  and  England,  in  the  Past  and  at  Present  (1919);  P.  W. 
Joyce,  A  Concise  History  of  Ireland  from  the  Earliest  Times  to 
1908  (20th  ed.  1914) ;  W.  O'C.  Morris,  Ireland,  U94-1905  (ed. 
1909);  Ernest  Barker,  Ireland  in  the  Last  Fifty  Years  {1806- 
1916)  (1917);  Sir  Horace  Plunkett,  Ireland  in  the  New  Century 
(1904);  for  critical  and  hostile  accounts,  T.  D.  Ingram,  A  His- 
tory of  the  Legislative  Union  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  (1887), 
A  Critical  Examination  of  Irish  History,  2  vols.  (1900),  from  the 
Elizabethan  conquest  to  1800;  on  Irish  conditions,  Adolphe 
Perraud,  Etudes  sur  VIrlande  Ccnitemporaine,  2  vols.  (1862); 
Louis  Paul-Dubois,  Ulrlande  Contemporaine  et  la  Question 
Irlandaise  {1907);  Francis  Hackett,  Ireland:  a  Study  in  Na- 
tionalism (1918). 

Home  Rule:  The  A  B  C  Home  Rule  Handbook,  ed.  by  C.  R. 
Buxton  (1912);  S.  G.  Hobson,  Irish  Home  Rule  (1912);  P.  Kerr- 
Smiley,  The  Peril  of  Home  Rule  (1911);  Against  Home  Rule: 
the  Case  for  the  Union,  edited  by  S.  Rosenbaum  (1912). 

The  Rebellion  of  1916:  The  Irish  Rebellion  of  1916,  edited  by 
Maurice  Joy  (1916);  L.  G.  Redmond-Howard,  Six  Days  of  the 
Irish  Republic  (1916);  W.  B.  Wells  and  N.  Marlowe,  .1  History 
of  the  Irish  Rebellion  of  1916  (1917). 


268  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Siim  Fein:  R.  M.  Henry,  The  Evolution  of  Sinn  Fein  (1919); 
P.  S.  O'Hegarty,  Sinn  Fein,  an  Illumination  (1919). 

Recent  Aspects:  Stephen  Gwynn,  The  Last  Years  of  John 
Redmond  (1919);  W.  B.  Wells  and  N.  Marlowe,  The  Irish  Con- 
vention and  Si7i}i  Fein  (1918). 

For  the  student  who  cares  to  go  further  afield  in  his  studies 
there  is  an  immense  body  of  important  and  interesting  informa- 
tion concerning  a  vast  variety  of  matters  about  Great  Britain 
and  the  United  Kingdom  in  the  Parliamentary  History,  the 
Parliamentary  Debates,  and  the  numerous  Parliamentary  Papers. 


CHAPTER  XI 
RUSSIA 

Th  n  yOoraii,  ti.i  n  oOn.ihiiafr, 
Tu  n  MorymH,  ti.i  h  6c3Cu.ihna.K, 
MaiyuiKa  Pycb! 

[Thou  art  destitute,  yet  abounding. 
Thou  art  powerful,  thou  art  weak, 
O  beloved  Mother  Russia!] 

Nekrasov  (1821-1878) 

For  ever  extending  its  base,  the  new  Demoeracy  now  aspires  to 
universal  suffrage — a  fatal  error,  and  one  of  the  most  remarkable 
in  the  history  of  mankind.  .  .  .  We  may  well  ask  in  what 
consists  the  superiority  of  Democracy.  Everj'where  the  strongest 
man  becomes  master  of  the  State. 

Among  the  falsest  of  political  principles  is  the  principle  of  the  sover- 
eignty of  the  people  ...  a  principle  which  has  unhappily 
become  more  firmly  established  since  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution. 

Were  we  to  attempt  a  true  definition  of  Parliament,  we  should  say 
that  Parliament  is  an  institution  serving  for  the  satisfaction  of  the 
personal  ambition,  vanity,  and  self-interest  of  its  members.  The 
institution  of  Parliament  is  indeed  one  of  the  greatest  illustrations 
of  human  delusion. 

KoNSTANTix  PoBiEDONOSTSEV,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  States- 
man (trans.  R.  C.  Long,  1898),  26,  27,  32,  34,  35. 

The  great  turning-point  in  the  history  of  Russia  in  the     The  era  of 
nineteenth  century  had  come  a  httle  before  1870,  following     reform  m 

Russia: 
the  disasters  of  the  Crimean  War  and  the  death  of  Nicho-     Alexander 

las  I,  when,  after  a  long  period  of  conservatism  and  re-     II 

pression,  it  had  seemed  necessary  at  last  to  undertake 

changes  and  reforms.     The  new  tsar,  Alexander  II  (1855- 

1881),  was  a  man  of  humane  and  liberal  disposition. 

At  once  he  reversed  the  policy  of  his  father  and  thus 

awakened  among  progressive  Russians  the  highest  hopes 

269 


270  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

of  what  would  be  done.  He  allowed  exiles  to  return  to 
Russia  and  pardoned  other  political  offenders.  The  uni- 
versities were  given  freedom  again,  and  Russians  allowed 
to  travel  abroad.  These  actions  made  a  most  favorable 
impression,  and,  as  is  always  the  case,  ardent  and  enthusi- 
astic people  believed  that  all  the  ills  of  Russia  were  about 
to  be  cured.  Generally  the  sentiment  was  much  like  that 
which  had  prevailed  in  France  just  before  1789.  There 
was  no  desire  to  overthrow  the  government,  but  to  reform 
long-standing  abuse§.  This  it  was  thought  the  tsar  him- 
self could  best  do. 
Abolition  of  At   once   Alexander   turned   himself   to   the   principal 

serfdom  problem  awaiting  solution.     Most  of  the  inhabitants  of 

in  Russia,  |-^-g  dominions  were  still  partly  unfree.  Serfdom  had  al- 
ready been  abolished  in  Poland,  and  there  were  many  free 
peasants  in  the  north  and  the  Cossacks  in  the  south,  but 
over  most  of  the  Russian  Empire  serfdom  prevailed.  He 
began  by  freeing  the  23,000,000  serfs  on  the  royal  domain 
or  crown  lands.  They  had  a  much  better  position  than 
any  of  the  others,  being  practically  free  and  merely  owing 
to  the  tsar  payments  that  were  the  equivalent  of  rent. 
Whenever  he  wished,  he  could  declare  them  free,  proclaim 
that  they  were  the  owners  of  lands  they  had  formerly 
cultivated  under  the  crown,  and  abolish  the  dues  they 
had  previously  paid.  In  1859  this  was  begun  and  the 
process  w^as  complete  seven  years  later.  Meanwhile,  he 
was  busy  persuading  the  nobles  not  to  resist  the  freeing 
of  their  serfs  also.  The  change  was  bound  to  come  to 
pass,  he  told  them,  and  it  was  much  better  that  it  be 
granted  from  above  than  forced  by  revolution  from  be- 
low. The  noblemen  made  no  determined  resistance,  and 
The  nobles  in  March,  1861,  an  edict  of  emancipation  was  proclaimed 
yield  to  the  ^vJiich  abolished  all  serfdom  in  the  Empire,  thus  emancipat- 
ing the  26,000,000  serfs  of  private  owners.  This  edict 
was  of  immense  importance  in  the  history  of  the  freedom  of 
the  human  race.     By  no  other  legislation  had  so  many 


RUSSIA 


271 


people  ever  been  made  free.  It  brought  serfdom  in 
Europe  to  an  end.  Thereafter  of  serfdom  and  of  shivery 
there  was  very  Httle  left  anywhere  in  the  world,  except 
for  the  4,000,000  negro  slaves  in  the  southern  common- 
wealths of  the  United  States  and  the  slaves  still  held  in 
Brazil. 

The  substance  of  this  edict  is  very  interesting.  In 
England  and  France  serfdom  had  disappeared  a  long  time 
before — gradually,  as  the  result  of  the  working  of  economic 
causes.  Serfdom  was  not  abolished  in  England,  but  in 
course  of  time  all  of  the  serfs  had  become  free.  Such  was 
largely  the  case  also  in  France,  for  when  serfdom  was 
formally  abohshed  there  in  1789  most  of  the  peasants 
were  already  free.  In  Russia  now,  as  in  the  United 
States  two  years  later,  the  unfree  population  was  made 
free  in  a  few  years,  almost  at  a  stroke.  In  Russia  this 
would  be  very  apt  to  bring  about  considerable  dis- 
location and  confusion,  as  indeed  it  did  in  the  United 
States,  for  society  was  being  altered  not  by  gradual 
development,  but  quickly  and  artificially,  by  law.  In 
the  Southern  States  of  America  the  enfranchised  negroes, 
made  completely  free  by  the  Federal  Government,  sank 
back  after  a  while,  many  of  them,  into  a  condition  of 
economic  servitude.  From  this  condition  the  utmost 
efforts  of  their  Northern  friends  could  not  save  them,  and 
from  it  they  have  only  gradually  and  in  part  escaped 
after  many  years,  as  they  have  been  able  to  acquire  the 
ownership  of  land.  In  England,  long  before,  the  decline 
of  serfdom  had  made  many  villems  free,  indeed,  but  driven 
them  away  from  the  land  which  they  had  cultivated,  and 
often  reduced  them  to  a  worse  economic  position  than 
before.  This  the  Russian  Government  now  strove  to 
avert.  Not  only  were  the  old  services  abolished,  but  to 
the  free  peasants  was  given  that  portion  of  the  land  which 
formerly  they  had  cultivated,  that  is  to  say,  a  part  of  what 
had  belonged  to  the  nobles  or  the  crown.     For  the  most 


Method 
of  the 
emancipa- 
tion 


Difficulties 
attending 
emancipa; 
tion 


272 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Results  of 
emancipa- 
tion 


The 

peasants 

disappointed 


part  the  ownership  of  this  property  was  vested  not  in  the 
individual  peasants,  but,  in  accordance  with  communal 
ideas  which  had  long  prevailed  in  Russia,  in  the  village 
communities  or  ?7iirs.  The  former  owners  were  to  be  paid 
by  these  communes,  to  which  the  government  would  ad- 
vance the  money  necessary  for  this,  the  communes  for 
forty-nine  years  to  pay  back  to  the  government  6  per 
cent,  of  the  amount  thus  advanced. 

This  change  involved  less  alteration  than  might  have 
been  expected.  To  the  world  at  large  the  edict  seemed 
a  great  triumph  of  liberty,  and  it  did,  in  conferring  on  the 
peasants  the  status  of  free  men  and  women,  abolish  a 
condition  that  discredited  Russia  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world.  But  emancipation  did  not  make  much  change 
in  the  condition  of  most  of  the  peasants,  and  doubtless 
nothing  could  have  produced  much  difference  in  any  short 
time.  The  peasants  who  had  formerly  cultivated  land, 
for  which  they  made  payments  and  rendered  service,  now 
cultivated  the  same  land,  or  in  many  cases  a  smaller  ex- 
tent, of  which  they  collectively  were  owners,  but  for 
which  they  had  to  make  yearly  payments  nevertheless. 
AMiere  before  they  had  been  bound  to  the  lord's  estate, 
now  they  were  bound  to  the  mir.  Before  they  had  been 
serfs  to  great  noblemen;  now,  it  was  said,  they  were  vir- 
tually serfs  of  the  State.  Indeed  they  were  bitterly  dis- 
appointed. They  had  long  hoped  that  some  day  the 
lands  on  which  they  lived  would  be  given  to  them  free 
of  any  encumbrance.  Furthermore,  with  the  rapidly  in- 
creasing population  of  Russia,  it  became  more  and  more 
evident  in  the  years  which  followed  that  not  enough  land 
had  been  given  to  support  the  peasants.  Most  of  them 
continued  to  live  in  very  abject  poverty,  and  in  ignorance 
and  filth,  even  though  they  were  now  free  men.  The 
peasants  began  to  hope  for  a  day  when  more  of  the  lands 
that  remained  to  the  nobles  and  the  crown  might  be 
given  them.     Only  so,  it  was  believed,  would  such  benefits 


RUSSIA 


273 


result  as  gradually  came  to  the  peasantry  of  France  in 
consequence  of  the  French  Revolution. 

Other  reforms  followed.  In  1HC4  the  Russian  judicial 
system  was  radically  changed,  in  accordance  with  prin- 
ciples long  before  gradually  developed  in  western  Europe. 
Judges  were  made  independent,  jury  trial  was  introduced, 
judicial  and  administrative  powers  were  separated,  and 
a  system  of  courts  established,  with  appeal  from  the  lower 
to  the  higher.  The  vast  mass  of  petty  cases,  which  in  all 
countries  always  make  up  the  bulk  of  judicial  business, 
and  which  for  a  long  time  in  England  had  been  dealt  with 
by  justices  of  the  peace,  w^as  now  to  be  handled  in  Russia 
by  similar  officials,  elected  by  the  people  of  the  locality. 

In  the  same  year  also  a  decree  of  the  tsar  established 
a  greater  measure  of  local  self-government.  In  their 
pettiest  concerns  the  peasants  had  some  self-government 
in  the  village  communities,  or  viirs,  but  this  was  all.  Rus- 
sia was  already  divided  into  thirty-four  "governments" 
which  were  composed  of  provinces  and  districts.  Self- 
government  was  now  given  in  these  larger  administrative 
divisions,  the  provinces  and  districts.  Each  of  these 
jurisdictions  was  now  to  have  an  assembly,  zeinstvo, 
made  up  of  the  large  landed  proprietors  of  the  locality 
and  of  delegates  indirectly  elected  by  the  peasants  and 
people  of  the  towns.  Substantially,  the  nobles,  the 
peasants,  and  the  bourgeoisie  were  represented  in  the 
zemstvos.  The  district  council  or  zemstvo  was  to  be 
elected  by  the  people  of  the  locality,  the  district  councils 
themselves  were  to  choose  the  members  of  the  provincial 
'zemstvos.  These  councils  w^ere  to  impose  the  local  taxes 
and  make  the  local  regulations,  which  were  to  be  carried 
out  by  standing  committees.  In  1870  dumas,  or  councils, 
were  established  in  the  Russian  cities,  the  members  being 
elected  according  to  the  Prussian  three-class  system,  by 
the  citizens  in  proportion  to  their  wealth. 

Other  changes  were  made,  and  it  seemed  that  much 


Judicial 

system 
reformed 


Local  gov- 
ernment 
reformed 


274 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Disappoint- 
ment in 
Russia 


Alexander 

becomes 

conservative 


improvement  must  result,  but  disappointment  and  reac- 
tion soon  clouded  the  prospect.  The  Russian  liberals, 
who  had  so  long  been  repressed  by  Nicholas,  were  at  first 
filled  with  all  sorts  of  pent-up  hopes,  believing  that  exten- 
sive reforms  would  regenerate  their  country  at  once. 
These  idealists  and  enthusiasts  had  no  real  conception 
of  the  difficulties  besetting  any  programme  of  reform  in  the 
country,  weighed  down  as  it  must  be  by  the  dead 
hand  of  the  centuries  of  ignorance  and  oppression  gone 
before.  Only  very  gradually  could  the  Russian  people 
be  changed  by  any  reforms,  and  no  improvement  could  be 
very  marked  until  a  new  generation  had  grown  up  in  the 
midst  of  the  new  age.  Hence  the  boundless  hopes  were 
soon  disappointed.  The  peasants  saw  little  difference 
between  their  former  condition  and  that  in  which  eman- 
cipation now  placed  them.  The  liberals  and  the  radicals 
who  had  no  practical  experience,  but  some  knowledge  of 
what  prevailed  elsewhere,  were  grieved  that  conditions 
in  Russia  were  not  speedily  made  like  what  they  knew  of 
in  England  and  France.  Furthermore,  the  reforms  that 
had  been  made  could  not  be  well  administered  at  first, 
since  they  were  opposed  by  all  the  conservatives,  and  no 
band  of  capable  administrators  could  at  once  be  produced 
to  make  them  work  well.  liOcal  government  could  not  be 
very  efficient  until  there  had  been  a  time  of  training  and  ex- 
perience, and  the  new  courts  could  not  give  fair  and  cheap 
justice  until  upright  and  capable  judges  were  procured. 

Alexander  himself  changed  also.  It  is  said  that  he  was 
not  really  a  liberal,  but  one  who  believed  that  alterations 
were  inevitable,  and  so  preferred  to  make  them  in  time 
rather  than  wait  for  violent  upheaval.  Furthermore,  he 
was  surrounded  by  reactionary  officials,  who  had  grown 
up  in  the  reign  preceding.  In  course  of  time  their  in- 
fluence was  felt.  And  finally  in  1863  came  another  re- 
bellion of  the  Poles,  after  which  the  tsar  soon  ceased  mak- 
ing reforms. 


jj  p(~-^         Petro^rad 

/*;  '*~Cy^,V'  •      /-,ilj      •. j.r.j*'- ,^    1  (St  Petersburg) 

itockholm  r  .^/''^nJeval 

/(Goiund  y--n<^''/lToSwraenI660v  ^^ 

^  ^^  /^  /  Y""'JtoRuss?.^172iA 

V  \  \  ._  Ceded  to  )  N  /f> 

-^^       g       N  M\   SAMOGITLA  y'X.Ross,al772_  „/  \^ 

:««,>?;':r,^Krn,gsber^-^.  oVilnay  ,'         .^^  ,  ^ 

,#•3         %    .-•''-'     '■'■^^■:':'y:':^  ^~Jf    ceded  to     \       ^     \VH  I  T',E     RD  S  S'J,  a  '  »^ 

;V*Cededto  X;/'-''s'''l^^;iiiiSi^^^  '<       Ceded  to         \  ,    y  ^'  r 

^^jypfossid  1772^,  „, I  ■>>'''c^ea  10   V^  '  ■'    Russia  1793       \  ^  "'  | 

•f "  '    r"'    J       ^'  '^''%^.s,'a  ]7«A'    f   B  L  A  C  K   /'r  U  S  S  I  A       \  \  I 

•V  .^Qix^  \  P'""3i79a/^    ;  ^'  \  \^    Ceded  to      | 

'^'^^''t'-A\  >Var,'u»/  ?^4         °^//  V----  V 

•V    n'^A    P        ^■'^^'         '  <L        Y>  ^16  /  Russia  1667     | 

■'V^^fo  p   '-^-X^    •■  \     Kirest-Litovsl\      S  ,'  | 

t.      1     o'C-VvV-'SJ       <' Au5tr,aJ795^^     \  \         ^  \  \ 

%    ^;:k  s;"^     T'-  '\,  \  L  I  TTLE/ RU  S  S  I  A  V 

<P        ^vi-  ir\-'  '^_,<J^  V  0  L  H  ^'N  I  A  ('oKiev  !<"•% 

•7     *|33*^'^«^  Ceded  to         ^'V/Y/\         !  ''  ^"^""'v  I 

i^^^Tl^u^'^-'^^^'^^^^^i  U    K    R    aS-^    E  Poltava- V 

Budapest/  \J>       \^  >        / 

♦  "^  n        '    -/ 

-.HUNGARY  "  moldavu-^ 

•'  TRANSYLVANIA  t3>        Q^ /Odessa" 

—  -•"—  Pofand's  greatest  Boundary  Limits  "^  ^'  ^      CRIMEA 

•aiBiia^  Poland's  Boundary  limits  1914 

\''.',  "*.'.'  BoOfl3ani  Umib  probjbly  den'rtd  in  1920' 

■XvK'Sv.  Plebiscite  Areas  ordained  by  tl>«  Congress  of  Paris  4n       /»         BLACK  .?■?,  ^, 

12.    I^UP  TO  ILLUSTRATE  THE  HISTORY  OF  POLAND 


275 


276 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Polish 
Rebellion, 
1863 


The  masses 
in  Poland  in- 
different 


It  was  another  despairing  effort  of  the  Poles  to  win  their 
freedom.  At  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century  their 
country  had  been  partitioned  between  Prussia,  Austria, 
and  Russia.  Now  the  country  in  which  most  of  them 
hved  was  merely  a  part  of  the  Russian  Empire.  But 
the  spirit  of  nationality,  which  was  rising  again  strongly 
in  Europe,  aroused  certain  classes  of  this  people.  The 
Italians  had  just  achieved  their  unity,  and  the  Germans 
were  about  to  make  a  united  nation.  Polish  patriots  be- 
gan to  dream  of  a  day  when  Poland  would  be  free  again, 
reviving  the  ancient  glories  of  the  time  when  she  held 
Lithuania  and  other  districts  subject.  Moreover,  the 
tsar  had  made  some  concessions  to  them,  enough  to 
raise  their  expectations,  but  less  than  they  desired.  Sud- 
denly an  insurrection  broke  out.  The  Poles  appealed 
to  the  free  nations  of  Europe  for  assistance,  and  much 
sympathy  was  aroused  in  England  and  France  and  else- 
where. Actually,  however,  the  movement  was  not 
formidable.  The  Prussian  Government  offered  help  to  the 
tsar,  but  it  was  never  needed.  Generally  the  Polish 
population  remained  passive.  Through  long  previous 
centuries  this  peasantry  had  been  bowed  under  the  most 
degrading  serfdom,  in  hopeless  poverty,  without  attach- 
ment to  the  masters  who  oppressed  them,  and  without 
any  feeling  of  patriotism  for  a  state  which  did  nothing  for 
them.  Therefore,  when  now  in  the  hour  of  need  Polish 
leaders  and  nobles  called  upon  them  to  rise  for  the  sake 
of  their  nation,  they  looked  on  with  indifference,  having 
not  yet  learned  to  care  enough  for  Poland,  and  caring 
little  who  were  their  masters.  The  rebellion  was  crushed, 
and  when  this  was  done  the  Russian  Government  took 
measures  to  crush  permanently  the  power  of  those  who 
had  made  it.  The  monasteries  of  the  religious  orders 
were  suppressed  and  their  lands  taken  away  from  them. 
About  half  of  the  lands  of  the  nobility  was  taken  and 
given  to  the  peasants,  with  a  view  to  reducing  the  nobles* 


Letts 
CISEI  Esthonians 

Tatars 
Mm  Cheremiss 


t'.V;y>';l  Armenians 
^^  Kalmaks 

GENERAL  ORAFIING  CO  INC  NY. 


13.    RACIAL  MAP  OF  RUSSIA 


277 


278 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Agrarian 
changes  in 
Poland 


Discontent 
increases  in 
Russia 


power  and  making  the  peasants  friendly  to  the  Russian  Gov- 
ernment. These  lands  were  to  be  paid  for,  but  by  a  tax 
not  only  upon  the  possessions  of  the  peasants  but  on  those 
of  the  nobles  as  well,  so  that  the  former  owners  were  com- 
pensated only  in  part.  The  results  of  this  were  important. 
The  influence  of  the  upper  classes,  among  whom  the 
spirit  of  Polish  nationality  was  strongest,  was  crippled. 
Furthermore,  the  condition  of  the  Polish  lower  classes 
was  improved,  and  contrary  to  what  was  sometimes  be- 
lieved in  other  parts  of  the  world,  the  economic  condition 
of  most  of  the  Polish  people  under  Russia  was  better  even 
than  in  Galicia,  where  the  Austrian  Government  had  done 
little  to  interfere  with  the  pri\aleges  of  the  Polish  nobles, 
but  where  the  peasants  continued  in  low  degradation. 
On  the  other  hand,  the  Russian  Government,  resolving  to 
make  a  Russian  province  out  of  Poland,  now  forbade  the 
use  of  the  Polish  language  in  any  government  business,  in 
university  lectures,  in  newspapers,  in  theaters,  in  schools, 
and  in  churches.  Against  this  the  Polish  people  made 
\'igorous  resistance,  and  in  the  struggle  that  ensued  the 
spirit  of  nationality  was  at  last  strongly  awakened  in  the 
mass  of  the  people,  who  began  to  hope  for  a  free  Polisli 
nation  in  the  future. 

Some  of  Alexander's  reforms  were  put  into  effect  after 
this  time,  but  he  now  became  conservative  and  suspicious. 
In  1865  the  nobles  of  Moscow  petitioned  the  tsar  to 
establish  representative  government,  but  neither  then 
nor  afterward  would  he  grant  either  parliament  or  con- 
stitution. He  had  begun  to  feel  that  autocracy  might  be 
weakened  by  further  concessions,  and  he  resolved  firmly 
to  uphold  his  power.  Discontent  increased.  Some  thought 
not  enough  had  been  done,  and  expectation  was  aroused 
by  what  had  been  done.  Moreover,  the  mere  passage  of 
time  and  the  changes  going  on  elsewhere  created  greater 
demands.  So,  in  the  despair  which  now  came  to  the 
liberals,  violence  and  extreme  radicalism  took  the  place 


RUSSIA 


279 


of  a  progressive  liberal  movement.  Nihilists,  extreme 
socialists,  and  terrorists  supplanted  the  liberal  reformers. 

The  term  nihilist  (nihil,  nothing)  is  said  to  have  been 
first  used  by  tlie  Russian  novelist  Turgeniev  in  his  novel. 
Fathers  and  Sons,  published  in  18G2,  to  signify  one  wlio 
accepted  nothing  without  critical  examination,  nothing 
on  authority  merely.  It  was  soon  applied  in  Russia  to 
intellectuals  who  accepted  nothing  in  Russia  as  good, 
contrasting  what  they  saw  there  with  conditions  in  other 
countries.  They  accepted  neither  the  autocratic  govern- 
ment of  Russia  nor  the  Greek  Catholic  faith  which  had  so 
long  ruled  men's  minds  there.  Turgeniev  described  his 
character  as  one  who  believed  that  there  was  no  institu- 
tion which  ought  not  to  be  destroyed  completely  and  at 
once.  What  was,  ought  to  be  overthrown,  in  order  that 
society  might  be  constructed  anew.  At  first  all  this  was 
merely  held  by  intellectuals,  who  talked  about  it  but 
were  not  prepared  to  go  further.  After  a  few  years, 
however,  it  was  translated  into  action.  About  1871 
there  was  a  great  stirring  in  the  minds  of  economic  radi- 
cals in  Europe.  The  Commune  of  Paris  had  just  at- 
tempted to  institute  a  new  social  and  political  order,  and 
even  its  failure  had  attracted  much  attention.  Further- 
more, the  socialism  of  western  Europe  was  beginning  to 
have  its  effect  upon  Russian  thinkers,  and,  more  im- 
portant still,  the  doctrines  of  violence  which  the  anar- 
chists taught. 

Active  anarchism  had  been  largely  developed  by  the 
Russian  Bakunin,  who  had  elaborated  his  ideas  from  the 
teachings  of  the  Frenchman  Proudhon.  Before  Marx 
had  begun  his  great  career  in  the  founding  of  modern 
socialism  Proudhon  published  in  1840  a  work  in  which 
he  asserted  that  property  was  theft,  and  declared  that  the 
existing  social  system  was  wrong.  But  he  did  not  pro- 
pose, as  did  Marx  somewhat  later,  to  substitute  public 
ownership  for  private.     He  believed  that  each  individual 


The 
nihilists 


The 
anarchists 


280 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Teachings  of 
Proudhon 
and 
Bakunin 


Agitation, 
unrest,  and 
repression 


slioiild  use  what  he  produced  with  his  labor.  This  led 
him  to  leave  ever3i:hing  to  the  individual  and  to  attack 
all  government.  He  believed  that  the  best  system  would 
be  that  in  which  there  was  no  government,  arzarc^?/  (dvapx(a). 
He  himself  did  not  believe  in  using  violence  to  bring  this 
about,  but  his  doctrines  were  taken  up  by  Bakunin,  who 
declared  that  capitalism  and  autocratic  government 
ought  to  be  destroj'ed  through  violence,  and,  where  this 
was  not  possible,  through  secret  assassination  and  terror. 
Now  in  Russia,  when  the  efforts  of  the  peaceful  radicals 
were  cjiecked  bj^  the  government,  and  many  were  pun- 
ished or  sent  into  exile,  the  movement  of  reform  and 
opposition,  after  changing  into  nihilism,  a  doctrine  held 
by  philosophers  and  students,  and  then  into  socialist 
propaganda,  got  into  the  hands  of  the  anarchists,  who 
attempted  to  create  a  reign  of  terror,  and  paralyze  the 
government,  or  at  least  take  vengeance  on  their  op- 
pressors. 

An  attempt  had  been  made  to  assassinate  the  tsar  in 
1866.  Thereafter  he  hearkened  more  than  ever  to  the 
reactionaries,  and  in  the  ten  years  after  the  Polish  revolt 
a  great  number  of  people  were  sent  to  Siberia.  Then  the 
agitators  rose  in  petty  insurrections.  As  the  revolution- 
aries became  more  \aolent,  the  governing  classes  were 
more  repressive.  The  old  censorship  was  partly  revived, 
and  the  harshest  punishments  were  imposed.  In  1878 
a  secret  committee  was  established  at  St.  Petersburg  to 
carry  on  war  against  the  government.  Literature  was 
printed  for  secret  distribution,  and  bombs  were  manu- 
factured for  the  assassination  of  public  oflScials.  In  a 
short  time  prominent  officials  were  done  to  death  by 
members  of  the  society,  and  attempts  were  made  to  kill 
the  tsar  himself.  Martial  law  was  proclaimed,  and  a 
minister  was  appointed  with  the  fullest  powers  of  a  dic- 
tator. In  1881  the  tsar,  yielding  somewhat,  gave  his  con- 
sent that  a  general   commission,  partly   representative, 


RUSSIA 


281 


should  be  summoned  to  consult  about  reforms.  But  on 
the  day  tliat  this  decree  was  si^nied  a  f(jurtli  attempt  was 
made  to  assassinate  him,  and  he  was  Ijlown  to  pieces  by 
a  bomb  hurled  as  he  was  passing  throu^'h  the  streets. 
Thus  perished  the  Tsar  Liberator,  author  of  the  most 
important  reform  made  in  Russia  for  generations,  victim 
very  largely  of  the  conditions  which  older  times  had  be- 
queathed to  him.  The  terrorists  at  once  |)ublished  a 
manifesto  in  which  they  promised  to  cease  their  activities, 
if  freedom  of  speech,  of  the  press,  and  of  meeting,  were 
allowed  in  Russia,  and  if  a  national  assembly  were  elected 
by  manhood  suffrage.  But  their  deed  was  about  to  usher 
in  a  period  of  sterner  and  more  terrible  reaction,  and  when 
at  last  changes  were  made  in  Russia,  they  were  to  come — 
as  in  France  long  before — not  through  constitutional 
amendment,  but  through  destruction  of  the  old  system 
by  revolution. 

Alexander  III  (1881-1894),  son  of  the  murdered  tsar, 
was  determined  to  avenge  the  death  of  his  father,  and 
crush  all  elements  of  disorder.  The  voice  of  God,  he  said, 
bade  him  strengthen  and  preserve  his  autocratic  power. 
In  temperament  he  was  a  reactionary  like  his  grandfather 
Nicholas  I.  And  in  the  efforts  which  he  now  made  he  was 
constantly  abetted  by  Pobiedonostsev,  Procurator  of  the 
Holy  Synod,  a  minister  who  at  the  end  of  the  century 
stood  for  the  conservatism  and  the  reactionary  ideas 
which  ]\Ietternich  had  upheld  at  its  beginning.  Alexan- 
der III  believed  that  the  good  of  the  Russian  state  would 
be  obtained  if  autocracy  were  strengthened  and  new  li})eral 
ideas  kept  out.  He  set  himself  to  the  task  of  undoing 
what  the  reactionaries  thought  were  his  father's  mistakes. 
Pobiedonostsev,  who  encouraged  him  in  all  that  he  did, 
developed  with  sincerity  a  philosophical  basis  for  the  ideas 
which  he  strove  to  apply,  and,  like  Metternich,  he  after- 
ward explained  them  in  his  Reflections.  He  believed  that 
autocratic  government  was  not  only  best  for  the  Russians, 


Assassina- 
tion of 
Alexander 
II,  1881 


Alexander 
III  and 
Pobiedon- 
ostsev 


282 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


but  best  in  itself,  and  that  democracy  was  a  cumbersome 
thing  which  had  arisen  in  the  errors  of  the  western  peoples. 
In  the  parliamentary  system  he  not  only  saw  the  defects 
which  others  have  seen,  but  believed  it  to  be  useless.  So 
Alexander  and  Pobiedonostsev  undertook  to  keep  Russia 
un  defiled  by  contamination  with  western  ideas,  to  with- 
draw such  concessions  as  had  recently  been  granted,  and 
by  stern  and  rigid  rule,  keep  Russia  what  they  thought 
she  should  be. 
Reaction  In  a  short  time  the  great  reforms  of  Alexander  II  were 

largely  undone.  The  peasants  who  had  received  freedom, 
though  little  economic  betterment,  by  the  edict  of  emanci- 
pation, were  put  back  under  the  control  of  the  local 
upper  classes  as  much  as  possible,  in  something  like  the 
same  way  that  the  white  people  of  the  South  immediately 
after  the  Civil  War  tried  to  keep  the  newly  enfranchised 
negroes  in  inferior  and  servile  position.  In  1886  it  was 
decreed  that  breach  of  contract  by  a  Russian  laborer 
should  be  a  criminal  offense,  thus  binding  the  lower  classes 
with  stricter  economic  control.  More  important  still, 
The  Land  hi  1889  the  local  elected  magistrates  were  replaced  by 
Captains  officials  known  as  Land  Captains,  to  be  appointed  by  the 

provincial  governor  from  among  the  upper  classes  of  the 
neighborhood.  They  were  given  not  only  judicial  but 
also  administrative  functions,  so  that  they  had  practi- 
cally unlimited  authority  over  the  peasants,  ruling  them  at 
the  behest  of  the  central  government.  In  this  way  the 
administration  of  justice  sank  back  into  the  evil  state  of  a 
generation  before.  About  the  same  time  the  character 
of  the  zemstvos  or  provincial  assemblies  and  the  dumas 
or  councils  of  the  cities  was  changed,  by  increasing  the 
representation  of  the  upper  classes  and  diminishing  that 
of  the  lower,  and  then  taking  from  the  assemblies  thus 
altered  much  of  their  power.  Some  of  the  zemstvos 
had  done  excellent  work  in  local  government  and  in  better- 
ing the  condition  of  the  people,  but  the  autocracy  of 


RUSSIA  283 

Alexander  and  Pobiedonostsev  had  no  desire  to  see  the 
people  governing  themselves  even  in  their  local  affairs. 

In  upholding  their  system  the  methods  of  Metter-  Repression 
nich's  age  were  again  employed.  There  was  stern  regula- 
tion of  the  press,  and  many  newspapers  were  stopped.  The 
universities  were  put  imder  strictest  control,  and  such 
supervision  was  extended  to  the  lower  branches  of  educa- 
tion. A  great  part  of  all  the  Russian  people  were  illiterate, 
but  from  those  who  got  an  education  in  Russia  all  perni- 
cious western  ideas  were  to  be  kept.  The  radicals  and 
nihilists  were  remorselessly  pursued  by  the  secret  police, 
and  the  police  of  Russia  under  the  direction  of  another 
reactionary,  Von  Plehve,  reached  a  terrible  efficiency 
previously  not  attained.  For  a  long  time  all  this  seemed 
to  succeed  well  enough.  The  tsar  spent  the  thirteen 
years  of  his  reign  apart  from  his  people,  apart  from  his 
ministers  even,  guarded  by  the  secret  police  and  by  in- 
numerable sentries,  safe  from  the  enemies  w^ho  continued 
to  threaten  his  life  as  they  had  threatened  his  father's.  The 
old  system  of  government  and  church  remained  unaltered 
and  unshaken.  The  nihilists  lost  influence  after  the 
assassination  of  Alexander  II,  and  presently  they  also  lost 
heart.  The  great  mass  of  the  people,  an  ignorant  peasan- 
try devoted  to  the  old  Russian  system  and  traditions,  even 
in  the  midst  of  misery  which  they  endured  but  did  not 
understand  how  to  cure,  remained  passive  and  loyal. 
There  was  no  powerful  middle  class  yet,  and  the  central 
government  with  its  vast  organization  of  officials  seemed 
to  hold  unassailable  position. 

In  accordance  also  with  his  ideas  of  governing  Russia  Russifica- 
well  and  making  her  great,  Alexander  entered  vigorously  tion 
upon  a  policy  of  Russifying  all  the  people  in  his  empire. 
He  wished  to  bring  about  greater  unity  and  strength  by 
obliterating  the  local  differences  that  divided  the  popu- 
lation of  his  domain.  Such  an  ideal  was  no  new  thing. 
It  had  been  cherished  by  the  riders  of  Austria  half  a 


284. 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  attain- 
ment of 
national 
unity 


The  peoples 
of  Russia 


century  before,  and  also  by  the  Hungarians  as  soon  as 
they  had  the  power  to  govern.     It  was  a  policy  which  the 
rulers  of  Germany  were  vigorously  carrying  out  in  Schles- 
wig  and  Posen.     Most  of  the  great  states  of  Europe  had 
once  been  formed  by  bringing  together  different  peoples. 
This  was  so  of  France  and  Spain  and  Italy,  and,  though 
long  time  had  obhterated  most  of  the  differences,  some  of 
them  still  remained.     The  differences  were  more  striking 
in  Germany  and  the  British  Isles,  for  the  Poles  of  Posen 
and  some  of  the  Irish  longed  to  separate  from  the  govern- 
ment over  them.     But  the  divisions  were  far  more  marked 
and  much  more  important  in  Austria-Hungary  and  the 
Russian  Empire.     In  the  Dual  Monarchy  Germans  and 
Magyars  often  worked  together  with  utmost  difficulty, 
while  a  great  number  of  Bohemians,  Rumanians,  Poles, 
and  South  Slavs  were  held  together  only  by  force.     In 
the  western  world  it  was  not  generally  realized  that  the 
Russian  Empire  contained  peoples  as  diverse  and  forces 
almost  as  disruptive  as  those  within  Austria-Hungary. 
There  was,  indeed,  a  great  difference  between  the  circum- 
stances of  the  two,  for  whereas  the  power  of  the  Dual 
Monarchy  was  based  upon  a  minority  made  up  of  Ger- 
mans and  Magyars,  the  power  of  Russia  was  founded 
upon  the  Great  Russians  who  were  much  the  largest,  the 
strongest,  and  the  most  important  element  in  the  State. 
None  the  less,  the  vast  expanse  of  the  Empire  contained 
other  elements  of  much  importance  which  had  not  yet 
been  welded  together,  while  in  the  outlying  portions  were 
large  districts  containing  non-Russian  peoples  who  had 
lost  their  freedom  and  were  held  in  unwilling  subjection. 
All  of  central  and  most  of  north  Russia  were  held  by  the 
Great  Russians.     But  to  the  south  in  the  Ukraine,  the 
richest  district  of  the  Empire  and  one  of  the  chief  sources 
of  the  wheat  supply  of  the  world,  the  people,  while  Slavic 
in  race,   and   adherents   of  the  Eastern   Catholic  faith, 
spoke  a  dialect  which  differed  from  that  of  the  Great 


RUSSIA  285 

Russians,  as  much  as  T>ow  German  was  unlike  High  (Jer-      The  lesser 

man,  and  tliey  liad  devel()i)e(l  a  h'teralure  of  llieir  own.    To        ,^^'*^  ^ 

1      -..n  •       -ri        •  1         M  I      I       L  elements 

the  west  lay  the  White  Russians,  also  Slavs  and  also  be- 

longin*?  to  the  Orthodox  Chureh,  but  speaking  yet  an- 
other dialect  of  Slavic;  and  the  Lithuanians,  an  Indo- 
European  people  closely  related  to  the  Slavs,  with  their 
own  distinct  speech,  and  adliering  to  the  Roman  Catholic 
religion.  Over  Lithuania,  and  to  a  less  extent  the  Ukraine, 
Polish  culture  prevailed  and  some  of  tlie  upi)er  classes 
were  Polish,  for  in  the  days  of  its  greatness  the  Kingdom 
of  Poland  had  included  these  outlying  dominions.  To 
the  east  of  European  Russia  the  vast  reaches  of  her 
Asiatic  empire  contained  a  sparse  population  of  many 
diverse  peoples  but  also,  as  the  principal  class,  Russian 
immigrants  from  Europe.  All  of  these  parts,  Great 
Russia,  the  Ukraine,  Lithuania,  Siberia,  were  sufficiently 
alike  to  unite  naturally,  and  the  local  differences  that 
persisted,  would,  under  good  administration,  do  no  harm 
or  else  disappear  in  course  of  time. 

This  was  not  so  in  some  of  the  outlying  parts  which  Outlying 
brought  Russia  down  to  the  sea  or  into  contact  with  cen-  parts 
tral  Europe.  In  the  far  north  were  the  Lapps,  a  Mon- 
golian people,  unimportant  in  their  distant  frozen  plains. 
To  the  south  of  them,  and  on  the  sea,  were  the  Finns,  also 
an  Asiatic  people,  whose  country  formerly''  had  for  a  long 
time  been  possessed  by  Sweden,  so  that  not  only  was  the 
civilization  Swedish  and  the  religion  Lutheran  but  the 
people  of  the  upper  class  were  Swedish.  Finland  had 
long  been  a  distinct  state,  as  Poland  had  been  at  first, 
organized  as  a  grand  duchy,  and  connected  with  Russia 
through  the  person  of  the  tsar.  These  people  had  been 
taken  by  conquest.  They  had  no  real  bond  of  union 
with  the  Russian  people;  they  were  greatly  jealous  of  any 
t^ncroachment  upon  their  p^i^^leges,  and  were  determined 
to  maintain  their  identity  and  character.  To  the  south 
of  the  Gulf  of  Finland,  on  the  Gulf  of  Riga,  and  do\^Tl  the 


of  the 
Empire 


286 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Diversity  of 
peoples 


The  Jews 
in  Russia 


coast  of  the  Baltic  were  provinces — ^Esthonia,  Livonia, 
Courland — taken  from  Sweden  or  Poland  when  Russia 
won  her  outlets  here  on  the  sea.  Their  people  were  Finns 
or  Letts,  a  branch  of  the  Lithuanian  people,  completely 
dominated  by  a  German  upper  class,  the  "Baltic  Barons," 
Farther  to  the  west  and  the  south,  and  thrusting  itself  in 
between  Prussia  and  Austria-Hungary,  was  Poland,  for- 
merly the  Kingdom  of  Poland  which  Russia  had  organized 
and  united  with  herself  under  the  tsar,  and  a  part  of  the 
independent  Poland  of  earlier  days.  The  Poles  were 
Roman  Catholic  in  religion,  and  while  Slavic  in  race,  were 
a  distinct  branch  of  the  Slavic  people,  speaking  a  tongue 
as  different  from  Russian  as  Swedish  was  from  German. 
For  a  long  time  they  had  been  the  leading  branch  of  the 
Slavs  in  Europe.  Now  they  continued  to  feel  that  their 
civilization  was  higher  than  that  of  the  Russians;  they 
clung  to  their  nationality  and  Roman  Catholic  faith  with 
passionate  devotion;  and  longed  vainly,  it  seemed,  for 
freedom  and  independence  once  more.  Far  to  the  south- 
east, between  the  Black  and  the  Caspian  seas,  was  Cau- 
casia, comprising  a  great  number  of  little  peoples  of 
different  races  and  religions,  strongly  conscious  of  their 
separate  nationality.  The  great  diversity  of  peoples  in 
the  Russian  Empire  was  strikingly  seen  in  some  of  the 
cities  on  the  Volga,  where  the  market  places  were  thronged 
with  multitudes  of  strange  people  speaking  a  babble  of 
different  tongues. 

Nor  was  this  all.  In  European  Russia  the  larger  num- 
ber of  the  Jews  of  the  world  long  continued  to  live,  clinging 
to  their  faith,  their  customs,  and  their  racial  consciousness 
as  the  Jews  have  generally  done.  More  important  but 
less  striking  was  the  German  element.  The  German 
people,  whose  eastward  extension  in  the  Middle  Ages 
had  laid  the  foundations  of  Austrian  and  Prussian  power, 
had  continued  their  movement  to  the  east,  and  for  a  long 
time  had  been  penetrating  the  lands  of  the  Russian  Empire, 


RUSSIA 


287 


where  by  their  superior  culture  and  efficiency  they  were 
able  to  exploit  the  natives.  In  the  Baltic  Provinces  the 
upper  class  was  German.  In  other  places  were  isolated 
colonies  of  Germans,  who  preserved  their  language  and 
racial  character.  Almost  everywhere  were  German  busi- 
ness men  and  skilled  artisans,  who  controlled  or  directed 
a  great  part  of  the  economic  life  of  the  state.  For  a  cen- 
tury and  a  half  the  tsars  had  usually  married  German 
princesses,  and  been  attended  by  German  favorites  and 
assistants.  All  of  this  was  natural  enough,  and  probably 
there  would  be  more  of  it  in  the  future.  Russia,  indeed, 
with  a  huge  population  of  backward  people,  with  illimit- 
able resources  and  raw  materials  to  be  exploited  and 
used,  lying  right  to  the  east  of  the  German  Empire  with 
its  intelligent,  highly  developed,  and  aggressive  people, 
was  for  Germans  the  best  field  for  economic  expansion. 
In  the  days  to  come  almost  certainly  such  relations  be- 
tween Germany  and  Russia  will  be  resumed. 

It  had  generally  been  the  ambition  and  the  proper 
policy  of  states  to  achieve  as  complete  a  unity  as  possible. 
In  France  and  Great  Britain  such  unification  had  long 
since  been  almost  completely  effected.  But  it  was  not 
entirely  achieved  in  the  German  Empire,  much  less  in 
Russia,  and  only  to  a  small  extent  in  Austria-Hungary. 
Posen  with  its  unwilling  and  oppressed  Poles  on  Germany's 
border  might  be  a  source  of  grave  danger  in  war;  so  Poland, 
and  Finland,  and  the  Baltic  country  on  the  Russian  frontier 
might,  unless  they  could  be  more  closely  united,  bring 
great  weakness  in  time  of  danger,  and  try  to  separate 
themselves.  Indeed,  when  the  great  disaster  came  in 
1917,  the  Ukraine,  Finland,  and  certain  Caucasian  dis- 
tricts soon  broke  away,  while  Poland  and  the  Baltic  Prov- 
inces had  already  been  lost.  It  was,  therefore,  the  desire 
of  Russian  rulers  to  do  away  with  the  differences  that 
divided  their  subjects,  and  make  of  them  one  Russian 
nation. 


Germans  in 
Russia 


Unification 


288 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Assimila- 
tion by  com- 
pulsion 


Methods 
of  Russifica- 
tion 


In  the  United  States  of  America,  where  the  population 
had  been  increased  by  immigration  from  all  parts  of 
Europe,  an  English-speaking  nation,  with  much  coherence 
and  unity,  had  been  easily  achieved  because  of  an  excellent 
system  of  education  and  as  a  result  of  liberal  institutions, 
which,  with  all  their  imperfections,  gave  men  great  free- 
dom to  use  the  abundant  economic  resources  of  the 
country.  The  children  of  immigrants  in  the  United 
States  of  their  own  accord  gave  up  the  alien  speech  and 
the  foreign  customs  which  their  parents  had  brought. 
But  in  Russia,  where  there  was  no  general  system  of 
education,  and  where  the  government  was  comparatively 
inefficient,  such  unification  could  only  be  attempted 
through  compulsion,  and  this  the  Russian  Government 
tried  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century. 

Under  Alexander  III  continued  attempt  was  made  to 
Russianize  all  the  people  of  Russia.  The  Jews,  the  most 
evidently  alien  part  of  the  population  and  greatly  disliked 
by  the  people  because  of  their  financial  ability  and  hard- 
ness, were  subjected  to  such  persecution  as  to  deprive 
them  of  "the  most  common  rights  of  citizens."  They 
were  concentrated  together  in  the  west,  in  what  was 
known  as  the  Jewish  Pale,  forbidden  to  own  land,  de- 
barred to  a  great  extent  from  schools  and  the  professions, 
and  often  left  to  the  mercy  of  furious  mobs.  In  Poland 
Alexander  continued  the  work  of  his  father;  Poles  were 
excluded  from  the  government  and  Russian  was  to  be 
taught  in  the  schools.  In  the  next  reign  the  particular 
privileges  of  Finland  were  withdrawn,  and  the  govern- 
ment put  in  the  hands  of  Russian  officials;  in  the  Baltic 
Provinces  Russian  was  proclaimed  as  the  official  tongue. 
The  Russian  Church,  as  always,  cooperating  with  the 
Russian  Government,  forwarded  the  work.  The  Holy 
Synod  persecuted  the  members  of  other  sects,  forcibly 
converted  some  of  them  to  the  Orthodox  Church  again, 
and  persecuted  the  missionaries  of  other  sects. 


RUSSIA 


289 


The  treatment  of  Ihe  Poles  and  the  Finns  awakened 
great  sympathy  in  oIIkt  i)arts  of  the  world,  and  some  of 
its  results  were  terrible  indeed.  But  this  i)oliey  of  Rus- 
sifieation  was  only  one  aspect  of  the  extreme  nationalism 
which  grew  constantly  so  much  stronger  in  the  nineteenth 
century.  In  the  latter  half  of  that  period  in  the  (German 
Empire  a  whole  school  of  writers  and  teachers  proclaimed 
that  the  German  j)e()i)le  were  the  best  and  the  greatest 
in  the  world,  that  their  civilization  was  superior  to 
any  other,  and  that  it  was  destined  to  spread  far  over 
the  earth,  and  deserved  so  to  spread,  since  wherever 
it  came  it  would  better  the  people  whom  it  reached. 
vSo,  during  the  same  time  there  rose  up  among  the  Slavs, 
and  especially  among  the  Great  Russians,  a  host  of 
writers  who  asserted  that  almost  all  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  Russian  Empire,  and  many  peoples  of  central 
Europe  and  the  Balkans,  were  of  the  great  Slavic  race, 
foremost  of  races  in  its  character  and  institutions,  and 
destined  to  have  the  most  glorious  future  of  all  the  peoples 
of  the  earth.  The  Russian  autocracy,  the  Orthodox 
Church,  the  village  community  of  the  Slavs,  were  all 
the  best  things  of  their  kind.  These  nationalists  in- 
culcated the  doctrine  of  Pan-Slavism,  just  as  in  central 
Europe  Pan-Germanism  was  similarly  taught.  It  was 
their  object  first  to  unify  the  peoples  within  Russia,  and  so 
make  her  stronger  and  then  ready  to  undertake  the  mis- 
sion of  protecting  all  the  other  Slavs,  perhaps  some  day  of 
uniting  them  all  together. 

The  Russian  Government  under  Alexander  III  was 
able  to  maintain  itself  and  strengthen  the  old  order  of 
things  and  resist  all  progress.  The  tsar  and  some  of 
his  principal  officials  believed  sincerely  that  the  system 
they  upheld  was  best  in  itself  and  for  the  best  inter- 
ests of  the  people.  In  their  own  way  they  labored  hard 
to  make  Russia  strong  and  great.  But  such  government 
as  they  succeeded  in  establishing,    above   the   influence 


Extreme 
Slavic  na- 
tionalism 


Strength  and 
weakness 
of  the 
system 


290 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

autocracy 
weakened 
by  ineffi- 
ciency and 
corruption 


Nicholas  II 


and  criticism  of  the  mass  of  tlie  people,  controlled  entirely 
by  the  Autocrat  of  all  the  Russias,  yet  mostly  adminis- 
tered by  a  large  number  of  officials  with  whom  he  rarely 
if  ever  came  in  contact,  and  who  therefore  did  much  as 
they  pleased,  contained  within  itself  the  causes  of  its  own 
destruction.  Many  of  the  officials  were  corrupt  and  in- 
efficient, powerful  in  oppressing  the  people  beneath  them, 
but  not  able  to  rule  honestly  or  well.  After  a  while 
the  Russian  Government  came  to  be  something  like  the 
systems  that  had  endured  so  long  in  western  Europe, 
then  fell  almost  of  their  own  weight  about  the  time  of  the 
French  Revolution.  It  might  maintain  itself  in  ordinary 
times  over  the  multitude  of  passive  Russian  peasants,  but 
most  probably  it  would  be  silently  undermined  by  imper- 
ceptible forces,  and  if  some  great  disaster  came  it  would 
suddenly  crash  down  into  ruins.  During  the  last  part  of 
the  nineteenth  century  the  old  Russian  system  was  in 
reality  being  shaken  by  the  Industrial  Revolution.  Then 
in  1905  the  disasters  of  the  Russo-Japanese  War  shook 
it  to  its  base,  and  the  greater  calamities  of  the  War  of  the 
Nations  at  last  destroyed  it  altogether. 

The  policy  of  Alexander  III  was  continued  by  his  son 
Nicholas  II  (1894-1918).  The  history  and  the  fate  of 
this  ruler  have  caused  him  to  be  compared  with  Louis  XVI 
of  France.  Like  the  last  French  ruler  of  the  Old  Regime, 
he  was  amiable  in  character,  but  also  weak  and  easily 
swayed,  whether  by  the  German  Emperor  in  foreign  af- 
fairs or  his  wife  and  his  ministers  at  home.  He  took  what 
he  found,  and  he  upheld  it  because  he  believed  it  was 
good.  To  diminish  his  autocratic  power  would  be  most 
foolish,  he  thought.  For  a  long  time  his  most  trusted 
adviser  also  was  Pobiedonostsev.  Von  Plehve  was  made 
minister  of  the  interior  and  given  enormous  power  for  the 
continuance  of  his  work.  Nicholas  approved  the  policy 
of  Russianizing  all  the  parts  of  his  dominions.  It  may 
be  that  had  he  been  stronger  in  character,  and  abler  as  a 


RUSSIA 


291 


ruler,  the  tragedy  which  overwhehned  him  and  the  dis- 
aster which  came  to  Russia  miglit  luive  been  averted; 
but  it  may  also  be  that  conditions  in  the  country  were 
such,  and  reforms  had  so  long  been  repressed  and  held 
back,  that  if  any  violent  dislocation  occurred  reforms 
would  be  carried  out  by  revolution. 

The  forerunner  of  the  great  changes  soon  to  take  place 
was  the  Industrial  Revolution,  after  the  emancipation  of 
the  serfs  the  most  important  thing  in  the  history  of 
Russia  in  the  nineteenth  century.  Especially  under  the 
guidance  of  Count  Sergei  Witte,  who  became  minister  of 
finance  in  1893,  an  immense  industrial  development  went 
forward.  The  Dual  Alliance  had  just  been  made  between 
Russia  and  France,  and  a  great  amount  of  capital  was 
loaned  by  the  French.  Rapid  increase  of  the  Russian 
agricultural  population,  which  was  obliged  to  support 
itself  upon  holdings  of  land  not  sufficiently  large,  drove 
increasing  numbers  of  Russian  peasants  to  the  cities  in 
search  of  work,  and  so  provided  an  abundant  supply  of 
cheap  labor.  Tariffs  were  imposed  to  protect  new  in- 
dustries, factories  multiplied,  and  the  population  of  the 
cities  rapidly  increased.  Railroads  w^ere  constructed  or 
extended,  until  Russian  mileage  exceeded  that  of  any 
European  country,  though  because  of  the  long  distances 
within  the  Empire  railway  facilities  continued  to  be  more 
inadequate  than  in  any  other  great  country  of  Europe. 

The  consequences  of  the  new  industrialism  in  Russia 
were  to  some  extent  what  they  had  been  long  before 
in  England  and  France  and  later  on  in  Austria-Hungary 
and  the  German  Empire.  About  the  middle  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  more  than  nine  tenths  of  the  people  of  the 
Russian  Empire  lived  scattered  in  the  country,  where  they 
carried  on  their  rude  agricultural  work.  Upon  this  rural 
population,  ignorant  and  extremely  conservative,  the 
earlier  reformers  and  radicals  had  been  unable  to  make 
any  impression,  and  so  the  nihilist  movement  had  come 


The  Indus- 
trial Revolu- 
tion in 
Russia 


Social 
conse- 
quences 


292 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Larger 

urban 
population 


Foreign 
affairs 


to  an  end  largely  because  it  remained  a  movement  with 
leaders  but  without  followers  among  the  people.  Now 
there  grew  up  a  larger  urban  population,  an  industrial 
proletariat  more  quickly  responsive  to  the  ideas  of  leaders 
who  -^^ished  to  change  the  government  and  the  system 
that  existed.  In  Moscow  and  St.  Petersburg  and  in  the 
Polish  cities  where  the  Russian  Industrial  Revolution  had 
begun  there  were  increasing  crowds  of  over-worked,  ill- 
paid  workingmen,  whose  economic  grievances  made  them 
very  willing  to  think  of  changes  in  the  State.  There  now 
rose  up  the  party  of  the  Social  Democrats,  who  hoped 
that  later  on  the  existing  system  would  be  overthrown, 
after  which,  in  a  regenerated  Russia,  there  might  be 
estabhshed  the  socialism  which  Karl  Marx  had  once 
taught  in  western  Europe.  The  new  leaders  obtained 
adlierents  more  easily  than  the  old,  yet  the  urban  popula- 
tion of  Russia  at  the  end  of  the  century  was  still  less  than 
14  per  cent,  of  the  whole.  But  the  new  ideas  soon  began 
to  affect  also  the  mass  of  the  peasants,  hitherto  inert.  The 
Social  Democratic  Party  of  the  workmen  organized  the 
factory  operatives  of  the  towns,  who  tried  to  better  their 
condition  and  get  their  reforms  by  strikes.  Among  the 
peasants,  who  had  no  land  or  who  had  not  enough  land  to 
support  them,  the  Socialist  Revolutionary  Party  rose  up, 
these  peasants  desiring  to  take  from  the  great  proprietors 
their  estates,  which  were  then  to  be  divided  among  the 
peasants  in  small  holdings. 

The  great  changes  which  shortly  took  place  resulted 
from  failure  in  foreign  relations  and  terrible  disasters  which 
profoundly  affected  all  the  people.  For  some  time  in 
the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  Russian  for- 
eign pohcy  continued  as  it  had  been  in  the  earher  part: 
friendship  was  maintained  with  Prussia  and  the  German 
Empire,  and  Russia  continued  to  try  to  expand  toward 
the  sea.  Her  efforts  to  dominate  the  Balkans  and,  per- 
haps, control  Constantinople  were  frustrated  by  Great 


14.    THE  RUSSJ 


EMPIRE  IN  1914 


I  -  -^.. 


RUSSIA 


293 


Britain  after  the  Russo-Turkisli  War  in  1878,  and  there- 
after by  the  opposition  of  Anstria-IIungary.  Germany 
drew  closer  in  alhance  with  the  Dual  ^Monarchy,  but  under 
Bismarck's  masterly  handling  of  foreign  relations  Russia 
was  bound  to  Germany  by  a  secret  treaty.  In  1890,  how- 
ever, the  new  German  Emperor  refused  to  prolong  this; 
and  three  years  later  Russia  joined  France  in  the  Dual 
Alliance,  thus  changing  her  foreign  policy  completely.  She 
now  had  increasingly  the  opposition  of  Germany  as  well 
as  of  Austria  in  the  Balkans,  and  while  continuing  to  take 
great  interest  in  affairs  there  she  turned  her  attention  more 
and  more  to  the  expansion  of  her  donn'nions  in  Asia.  Long 
before,  all  of  northern  Asia,  or  Siberia,  had  been  taken  as 
far  as  the  Pacific,  but  always  the  Russians  hoped  to  go  to 
the  southward  and  reach  ports  on  the  warmer  seas.  Much 
progress  was  made,  but  always  in  western  Asia  the  power 
of  Great  Britain  in  the  end  blocked  the  way. 

In  the  eastern  half  of  the  continent  Russia's  southern 
neighbor  was  China,  and  here  the  prospect  of  success  was 
greater,  for  China  was  stagnant  and  in  decay,  and,  at  the 
end  of  the  century,  seemed  just  about  to  fall  to  pieces.  Still 
farther  to  the  east,  it  is  true,  the  Japanese,  in  their  island 
empire,  had  taken  up  western  civilization  and  methods 
with  amazing  capacity,  and  in  1891-5  gained  a  complete 
triumph  in  the  Chinese-Japanese  War.  But  Japan  was 
not  yet  regarded  as  a  match  for  any  great  European 
power,  and  at  once  she  was  compelled  by  Russia,  Ger- 
many, and  France  to  renounce  most  of  the  fruits  of  her 
victory.  The  so-called  Trans-Siberian  Railway,  which  had 
been  begun  in  1891,  and  which  was  to  run  from  Moscow  to 
Vladivostok  on  the  Pacific,  was  being  pushed  steadily 
forward,  and  Russian  expansionists  dreamed  of  splendid 
possessions  soon  to  be  got  from  the  dying  Chinese  Empire, 
and  the  acquisition  at  last  of  an  ice-free  port.  This  was  a 
time  when  apparently  China  was  about  to  be  divided  up 
among  predatory  European  powers.     In  1897  the  Germans 


Russia,  the 
German 
Empire, 
Austria- 
Hungary 


Russia, 
China,  and 
Japan 


294 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


European 
powers 
seize  parts 
of  China 


The  Russo- 
Japanese 
War,  1904-5 


Japan  gets 
control  of 
the  sea 


seized  Kiao-chaii.  Next  year  France  secured  concessions 
in  southern  China.  At  the  same  time  Russia  obtained 
much  greater  ones  in  the  north.  In  1898  she  procured 
from  the  Chinese  Government  the  right  to  build  the  Siber- 
ian Railway  across  Manchuria,  and  she  was  soon  in  posses- 
sion of  that  province.  She  also  got  a  lease  of  the  great 
stronghold  and  strategic  position.  Port  Arthur,  at  the  end 
of  the  Liao-tung  Peninsula,  from  which  Japan  had  shortly 
before  been  compelled  to  go,  and  which  she  now  joined 
with  her  railway  by  a  branch  line,  and  converted  into  one 
of  the  strongest  positions  in  the  world.  After  the  Boxer 
outbreak  in  1900  the  Russians  took  complete  possession 
of  Manchuria,  and  in  the  years  which  followed  threatened 
to  advance  farther  and  absorb  Korea,  which  lay  on  the 
flank  of  their  communication  between  Manchuria  and  Liao- 
tung.  Not  only  had  the  Japanese  long  wished  to  obtain 
Korea,  but  such  was  its  geographical  position,  pointed 
directly  at  the  heart  of  Japan,  that  in  the  hands  of  Russia 
it  might  be  as  dangerous  as  Belgium,  in  the  possession  of 
Napoleon  or  the  German  Empire,  would  have  been  to 
Great  Britain.  Quickly,  therefore,  a  great  conflict  loomed 
up.  In  February,  1904,  the  Japanese  suddenly  struck 
and  then  declared  war. 

Japan  was  greatly  inferior  in  resources,  but  she  had  a 
modern  army,  with  brave,  hardy,  and  devoted  soldiers, 
and  an  excellent  fleet.  Russia,  far  stronger,  with  greater 
army  and  fleet,  was  badly  organized  and  poorly  prepared, 
and  fought,  moreover,  at  a  long  distance  from  her  base. 
Her  communications  lay  practically  over  the  one  line  of 
the  Trans-Siberian  Railway.  Japan  was  closer  to  the  area 
of  conflict. 

For  Japan  the  first  essential  and  the  indispensable  condi- 
tion was  control  of  the  sea.  The  beginning  of  the  struggle 
found  the  Russian  fleet  in  the  East  divided,  part  at  Port 
Arthur,  part  at  Vladivostok.  At  once,  before  declaration 
of  war  had  been  made,  the  warships  in  Port  Arthur  were 


15.     TIIE  RUSSO-JAPANESE  WAR 
295 


296 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Japanese 
victories 
on  land 


Mukden 


Tsushima, 
the  decisive 
victory 


attacked  and  greatly  damaged.  When  at  last,  some  months 
later,  this  fleet  came  forth  to  battle,  it  sustained  a  terrible 
defeat,  and  the  shattered  remains  were  withdrawn  into 
the  inner  harbor.  The  squadron  at  Vladivostok  was  also 
destroyed,  and  the  Japanese  held  undisputed  control  of 
the  sea  for  a  time. 

Meanwhile,  they  had  not  hesitated  to  send  a  great  army 
over  into  Korea,  from  which  an  inferior  force  of  Russians 
was  quickly  driven.  Then  one  Japanese  army  advanced 
into  Manchuria,  while  another  went  down  the  Liao-tung 
Peninsula  to  lay  siege  to  Port  Arthur.  Everywhere  the 
Russians  were  defeated.  In  September  at  Liao-yang  was 
fought  the  first  great  battle  in  which  the  fearful  new  de- 
vices of  war  were  used  by  large  armies.  The  Russians 
were  entrenched  in  a  fortified  position,  but  after  terrible 
slaughter  the  Japanese  drove  them  out.  All  the  time  the 
Russians  were  being  rapidly  reinforced  and  they  soon 
turned  upon  their  enemies,  but  they  had  little  success. 
Meanwhile,  the  Japanese  attempted  to  carry  the  almost 
impregnable  fortress  of  Port  Arthur  by  storm.  Hideous 
slaughter  resulted,  but  after  a  long  siege  they  won  the 
commanding  position  of  203-Metre  Hill,  from  which  their 
artillery  fire  could  be  directed,  and  in  January,  1905,  the 
fortress  was  taken.  At  the  end  of  February  the  main 
Japanese  army,  reinforced  by  the  army  which  had  cap- 
tured Port  Arthur,  and  now  amounting  to  about  300,000 
men,  attacked  the  Russians  who  had  nearly  the  same 
number.  In  the  next  two  weeks,*  in  a  great  struggle 
known  as  the  Battle  of  Mukden,  the  Russians  were  driven 
back  in  complete  defeat,  losing  a  third  of  their  number; 
but  the  Japanese  were  unable  to  do  that  which  they  strove 
for:  surround  the  beaten  enemy  and  destroy  or  capture 
their  army. 

In  all  the  principal  engagements  thus  far  the  Russians 
had  been  beaten.  But  bad  as  was  their  record  they  might 
still  hope  for  victory  in  the  end,  for  whereas  the  Japanese 


RUSSIA 


297 


had  brought  into  play  noarly  all  their  force,  the  Russians, 
who  were  not  yet  vitally  wounded,  had  used  only  part  of 
theirs.  If  they  could  get  control  of  the  sea,  the  Japanese 
armies  would  at  once  be  cut  off  from  their  base,  and 
quickly  forced  to  yield.  If  this  failed,  then  in  a  contest  of 
resources  Japan  might  first  be  worn  out.  The  Baltic 
Fleet,  what  remained  of  Russia's  power  on  the  sea,  was 
already  on  the  way  around  the  world.  After  a  long 
voyage  it  drew  near  to  the  Sea  of  Japan,  superior  to  the 
enemy  in  numbers,  but  far  inferior  in  equipment  and 
personnel.  May  27,  1905,  it  encountered  the  Japanese 
fleet  under  Admiral  Togo  in  the  Battle  of  Tsushima,  by 
far  the  greatest  sea  fight  since  Trafalgar,  and  one  of  the 
most  decisive  in  history.  There  the  Japanese  ships,  with 
superior  speed  and  range  of  fire,  took  up  the  position 
they  desired,  and  performed  the  maneuver  of  "capping 
the  line."  As  the  Russian  fleet  advanced  in  cohinm  for- 
mation, the  Japanese  ships  at  their  own  distance  steamed 
across  the  path  of  the  approaching  enemy,  and  destroyed 
his  ships,  one  by  one.  The  Russian  fleet  was  annihilated, 
and  Japanese  control  of  the  sea  finally  assured. 

The  war  was  not  yet  won,  however.  The  Russian 
army,  constantly  reinforced,  was  now  stronger  than  at  any 
previous  time  in  the  war.  On  the  other  hand,  what  was 
only  suspected  then  but  revealed  later  on,  Japan  was  al- 
most completely  exhausted.  If  the  Russians  persisted, 
time  was  almost  certainly  on  their  side.  But  domestic 
considerations  now  caused  them  to  lose  heart  and  abandon 
the  struggle.  President  Roosevelt  of  the  United  States 
attempted  to  mediate  between  the  contestants,  and  their 
plenipotentiaries  met  at  Portsmouth,  where  a  treaty  was 
signed  September  5.  By  the  terms  of  the  Treaty  of 
Portsmouth  Russia  abandoned  to  Japan  Port  Arthur  and 
her  rights  in  the  Liao-tung  Peninsula,  gave  over  her  at- 
tempts upon  jNlanchuria  and  Korea,  and  ceded  to  Japan 
the  southern  part  of  Sakhalin,  an  island  to  the  north  of 


Struggle  for 
control  of 
the  sea 


The  Treaty 
of  Ports- 
mouth, 1905 


298 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Discontent 
and  disorder 
in  Russia 


Terror  and 
uprising:  the 
Russian  Re- 
volution of 
1905 


the  Japanese  group,  and,  indeed,  forming  an  extension  of 
the  archipelago  of  Japan.  The  enormous  consequences 
tJiat  followed  from  this  war,  which  even  yet  can  but 
dimly  be  seen,  belong  only  in  part  to  the  history  of  Europe. 
In  the  Far  East  Japan  became  the  dominant  power,  and 
presently  seemed  to  threaten  China.  In  Europe,  so 
greatly  was  Russia  weakened  that  the  balance  of  power 
was  completely  destroyed,  and  Germany  for  a  while 
dictated  the  politics  of  Europe. 

Russia  had  yielded  to  Japan  partly  because  her  resources 
were  strained,  but  mostly  because  such  unrest  and  con- 
fusion had  arisen  that  the  whole  structure  of  her  govern- 
ment seemed  near  to  collapse.     The  system  which  the 
government  had  upheld  by  force,  by  arbitrary  arrests,  by 
secret  trial,  by  banishment  to  Siberia,  through  the  power 
of  the  secret  police  and  the  army,  could  be  maintained 
only  so  long  as  Russia  was  at  peace.     Now  the  government 
was  deeply  involved  in  a  distant  war,  which  was  never 
popular,  which  most  of  the  people  ill  understood,  in  which 
patriotic  fervor  was  never  aroused.     Had  there  been  a 
great  success,  the  military  glory  abroad  might  have  stilled 
discontent  at  home;  but  when  news  came  of  repeated  and 
shameful  defeats  in  Manchuria  and  on  the  seas  about 
China,  popular  fury  burst  out.     So  the  radicals  among 
the  workingmen  of  the  towns,  the  radical  peasants  in  the 
country,  the  liberals  of  the  upper  and  middle  classes,  and 
all  the  oppressed  peoples — the  Jews,  the  Poles,  the  Finns, 
and  others — turned  against  the  authorities;  and  in  the 
confusion  of  the  war  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  resist 
them. 

In  July,  1904,  Von  Plehve  was  blown  to  pieces  by  a 
bomb.  In  the  following  February  the  Grand  Duke 
Sergei,  reactionary  uncle  of  the  tsar,  was  assassinated. 
Thereafter  a  great  many  murders  of  officials  took  place. 
In  the  cities  workingmen  declared  great  strikes,  and  pres- 
ently a  general  strike  brought  widespread  demoralization. 


RUSSIA 


299 


In  the  country  districts  angry  and  ignorant  peasants  drove 
away  country  gentlemen  and  noljle  landlords,  burning  their 
houses  and  taking  their  lands  as  peasants  in  France  had 
done  a  century  before.  In  some  parts  of  the  country  it 
was  diflBcult  to  operate  the  railways,  and  in  outlying 
provinces  armed  insurrections  broke  out.  On  "Red  Sun- 
day," January  22,  1905,  a  great  procession  of  strikers  in 
St.  Petersburg  followed  a  priest  to  present  a  petition  t(j 
the  tsar;  but  the  troops  fired  upon  them,  and  the  blood- 
shed aroused  wild  indignation  and  horror.  During  all 
this  time  the  liberals  of  the  upper  classes  were  demanding 
reforms;  and  they  along  with  many  others  insisted  that 
the  war  should  be  ended. 

Nicholas  II  soon  yielded  to  the  general  clamor.  He 
tried  at  first  to  satisfy  the  people  with  small  reform.  Some 
concessions  were  made  to  the  Poles,  the  Lithuanians,  and 
the  Jews;  presently  Finland  recovered  her  constitution; 
and  the  arrears  due  from  the  Russian  peasants  were  re- 
mitted. But  he  was  urged  to  summon  a  national  assem- 
bly; so  in  August,  1905,  he  proclaimed  a  law  establishing 
an  Imperial  Duma,  or  assembly,  to  advise  him  in  legislative 
work.  He  dismissed  Pobiedonostsev  and  other  reaction- 
aries previously  all-powerful,  and  appointed  Witte  to  be 
prime  minister  in  the  cabinet  now  to  be  set  up.  Then  he 
issued  the  October  Manifesto  which  established  freedom  of 
religion,  of  speech,  and  of  association,  and  promised  that 
thereafter  no  law  should  be  made  without  the  Duma's 
consent.  A  series  of  decrees  provided  that  the  members 
of  the  Duma  should  be  elected  practically  by  universal 
suffrage.  The  old  Council  of  State,  which  had  been  much 
Hke  a  king's  council  in  the  Middle  Ages,  was  now  clianged 
so  that  part  of  its  members  were  indirectly  elected,  and 
it  was  made  the  upper  house  of  the  National  Assembly 
with  the  Duma  as  the  lower. 

These  reforms  had  been  yielded  in  a  period  of  great 
weakness.     It  was  soon  possible  for  most  of  them  to  be 


The  first 
Duma  pro- 
claimed 1905 


The  October 
Manifesto 


Speedy 
reaction 


300 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

reformers 
divided 


The  "Black 
Hundreds" 


The  first 
Duma,   1906 


taken  away.  The  bureaucracj'^  of  officials  and  most  of 
the  powerful  upper  class  were  sternly  against  the  conces- 
sions. INIoreover,  the  reformers  almost  immediately  be- 
gan to  fall  apart.  To  the  radicals  it  seemed  that  little 
had  been  accomplished,  and  they  desired  to  bring  about 
much  more  fundamental  changes.  The  liberals  divided 
into  two  parties:  the  "Octobrists"  were  content  with 
what  had  been  granted  by  the  tsar  in  the  October  Mani- 
festo, and  they  wanted  a  strong  united  Russia  now  under 
his  rule;  the  "Constitutional  Democrats"  or  "Cadets" 
mider  their  well-known  leader  Professor  Miliukov,  wanted 
a  constitutional  government  like  that  of  England  or 
France,  with  responsible  ministers  completely  controlled 
by  elected  representatives  of  the  people,  and  they  ad- 
vocated a  federal  union  for  the  different  parts  of  the  Em- 
pire. 

In  September,  1905,  the  war  with  Japan  was  ended.  The 
government  was  immediately  relieved  from  much  of  its 
embarrassment,  and  it  had  now  a  far  greater  military 
force  to  be  used  at  home.  It  was  not  long  before  the 
nobles,  great  landlords,  and  reactionaries  generally, 
united,  and  becoming  stronger,  by  means  of  armed  forces 
known  as  the  "Black  Hundreds,"  began  to  drive  away  the 
radicals  and  undo  the  changes  which  they  had  accom- 
plished. During  the  same  time  the  tsar  began  to  with- 
draw the  powers  he  had  given  to  the  Duma.  In  a 
decree  of  March,  1906,  he  proclaimed  that  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  Empire  were  not  to  be  within  the  power  of  the 
Duma,  and  declared  that  foreign  affairs,  the  army,  the 
navy  were  exclusively  within  his  own  jurisdiction.  In 
May,  1906,  the  first  Duma  assembled,  but  it  was  unable  to 
control  the  ministers,  and  after  a  bitter  struggle  it  was 
dissolved  in  July.  The  Cadets,  who  had  made  up  the 
majority  of  the  body,  would  not  accept  the  dismissal,  and, 
retiring  to  Viborg  in  Finland,  called  on  the  Russian  peo- 
ple to  support   them.     But   reaction  was  now  running 


RUSSIA 


301 


strongly;  many  of  the  government's  opponents  were  put 
to  death,  and  many  more  hanislied  from  tlie  country. 

A  second  Duma  was  assembled  next  year,  but  the  op- 
ponents of  the  government  again  controlling  it,  and 
again  seeking  radical  changes,  it  also  was  dissolved  after 
sitting  for  three  months.  The  tsar  n(nv  issued  a  decree 
by  which  the  electoral  law  was  so  altered  that  control 
would  pass  to  the  conservatives  and  the  wealthy  classes. 
The  third  Duma,  elected  in  1907,  contained  a  majority 
willing  to  acquiesce  in  the  government's  policy.  The 
Duma,  accordingly,  remained  a  consultative  body,  much 
like  the  English  parliament  had  been  three  hundred  years 
before,  which  was,  perhaps,  as  nmch  as  the  Russian  people 
were  capable  of  using  in  their  stage  of  political  evolution. 
The  Almanack  de  Gotha,  with  what  the  Russian  radical 
Trotzky  described  as  unconscious  humor,  declared  that  the 
government  of  Russia  was  "a  constitutional  monarchy 
under  an  autocratic  tsar."  Under  Stolypin,  the  principal 
minister,  stern  measures  were  taken  against  the  radicals, 
and  they  were  completely  suppressed.  Some  reforms  were 
mdeed  made.  In  1906  the  peasants  were  allowed  to  be- 
come individual  owners  of  their  land  allotments  in  the 
Mir;  and  so  far  as  this  was  carried  out,  it  brought  the  old 
communal  holding  to  an  end. 

Such  was  this  first  Russian  Revolution.  Temporarily, 
in  the  midst  of  the  weakness  of  the  government,  it  ac- 
complished striking  reforms,  and  was  not  unlike  the  first 
part  of  the  French  Revolution  long  before.  But  it  was 
soon  seen  to  be  more  like  the  Revolution  of  1848  in 
central  Europe,  for  its  movers  were  really  too  weak  to  ac- 
complish important,  lasting  results,  and  it  soon  lost  most 
of  its  gains  in  the  period  of  reaction  that  followed.  There 
was  needed  a  mightier  outburst,  more  like  the  destructive 
part  of  the  French  Revolution,  to  quickly  break  the  old 
order  to  pieces. 

What  the  future  of  Russia  might  have  been  had  peace 


The  second 
Duma,   1907 


The  third 
Duma,  1907 


Failure  of 
the  Russian 
Revolution 
of  1905 


302 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  years 
before  the 
Great  War 


Russia  and 
the  Balkans 


lasted,  whether  the  reactionaries  would  have  seated  them- 
selves more  firmly  in  power,  or  whether  constitutional 
progress   would   have   gone   slowly   forward,   cannot   be 
knoANTi.     In  the  years  between  the  Revolution  of  1905  and 
the  Great  War  the  country  seemed  to  settle  down ;  slowly 
the  harsh  measures  of  government  were  lessened ;  the  rav- 
ages of  the  war  were  repaired;  the  army  was  strengthened; 
a  great  appropriation  was  made  to  rebuild  the  navy;  and 
increasingly  Russia  took  her  place  once  more  in  European 
councils.     Again    she    became    a    powerful    member    of 
the  Dual  Alliance,  and  presently  settling  her  differences 
with  England,  along  with  England  and  France  made  the 
Triple  Entente.     Her  expansion  in  the  Far  East  having 
been  checked  she  turned  again  with  greater  interest  to  the 
Balkans,  coming  there  into  more    and  more   dangerous 
rivalry  with  Austria-Hungary  and  the  German  Empire. 
It  was  this  clash  of  interests  which  produced  the  Bosnian 
crisis  of  1908-9,  in  which  Russia  yielded;  the  crisis  of  1912, 
occasioned  by  the  Balkan  War,  in  which  she  held  her 
own;  and  the  crisis  of  1914,  which  led  to  the  War  of  the 
Nations,  m  which  presently  Russia,  Austria-Hungary,  and 
the  German  Empire  all  went  down  into  ruin. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  Gregor  Alexinsky  (trans,  by  B.  Miall),  Modern 
Russia  (1913),  by  a  socialist;  Maurice  Baring,  The  Russian 
People  (2d  ed.  1911) ;  H.  G.  S.  von  Himmelstjerna  (English  trans, 
by  J.  Morrison),  Russia  under  Alexander  III  and  in  the  Preceding 
Period  (1893) ;  Ludwik  Kulczycki,  Geschichte  der  Russischen  Revo- 
lution, 3  vols.  (1910-14),  German  trans,  from  the  Polish,  covers 
the  period  1825-1900;  Alphons  Thun,  Geschichte  der  Revolution- 
dren  Bewegungen  in  Russland  (1883);  and  for  a  book  revealing 
with  peculiar  ability  and  force  the  part  of  the  ruling  class,  Kon- 
stantin  P.  Pobiedonostsev,  Reflections  of  a  Russian  Statesman 
(trans,  by  R.  C.  Long,  1898). 

The  Jews:  Israel  Friedlander,  The  Jews  of  Russia  and  Poland 
(1915). 
Siberia:  George  Kennan,  Siberia  and  the  Exile  System,  2  vols. 


RUSSIA  303 

(4th  ed.  1897);  M.  M.  Shoemaker,  The  Great  Siberian  Railway 
(1903). 

The  Russians  in  Asia:  A.  J.  Beveridge,  The  Russian  Advance 
(1903);  Lord  Curzon,  Russia  in  Central  Asia  (1889);  Alexis 
Krause,  Russia  in  Asia  (1897),  hostile;  II.  Lan.sdell,  Russian 
Central  Ada,  2  vols.  (1885) ;  G.  F.  Wright,  Asiatic  Russia,  2  vols. 
(1902),  best  account. 

Japan:  F.  Brinkley  and  Baron  Kikuchi,  A  History  of  the 
Japanese  People  from  the  Earliest  Times  to  the  End  of  the  Meiji 
Era  (1915),  best;  Marquis  de  la  Mazeliere,  Le  J  upon:  Ilistoire 
et  Civilisation,  5  vols.  (1907-10);  G.  H.  Longford,  The  Story  of 
Korea  (1911). 

The  Russo-Japanese  War:  K.  Asakawa,  The  Russo-Japanese 
Conflict  (1904);  A.  Chcradame,  Le  Monde  et  la  Guerre  Russo- 
Japonaise  (1906);  A.  S.  Hershey,  The  International  Law  and 
Diplomacy  of  the  Russo-Japanese  War  (1906);  A.  N.  (General) 
Kuropatkin,  The  Riissian  Army  and  the  Japanese  War,  2  vols, 
(trans,  by  A.  B.  Lindsay,  1909);  The  Russo-Japanese  W^ar,  by 
the  Historical  Section  of  the  German  General  Staff,  trans,  by 
Karl  von  Donat,  5  vols.  (1908-10),  it  was  the  German  military 
experts  who  most  thoroughly  comprehended  the  lessons  of  this 
conflict;  F.  E.  Smith  and  N.  W.  Sibley,  International  Law  as 
Interpreted  During  the  Russo-Japanese  War  (1905). 

The  Revolution  of  1905  and  the  years  following:  Alexander 
Iswolsky,  Recollections  of  a  Foreign  Minister  (1921);  Maxime 
Kovalevsky,  La  Crise  Russe  (1906) ;  Paul  Miliukov,  Russia  and 
Its  Crisis  (1905);  Bernard  Pares,  Russia  and  Reform  (1907);  S. 
N.  Harper,  The  New  Electoral  Law  for  the  Russian  Duma  (1908); 
Paul  Vinogradoff,  The  Russian  Problem  (1914)  Count  Sergei 
Witte,  Memoirs  (1921). 


CHAPTER  XII 

AUSTRIA-HUNGARY,  TURKEY,   AND 
THE  BALKANS 

A  E  I  O  U 

[Austria  Erit  In  Orbe  Ultima 
Austriae  Est  Iinperare  Orbi  Universo 
AUes  Erdreich  1st  Oesterreich  Unterthan] 

Motto  of  the  Hapsburgs,  adopted  in  1443. 

Ich  bin  kein  Deutscher,  sondern  ein  Oesterreicher,  ja  ein  Nieder- 
oesterreicher,  und  vor  allem  ein  Wiener. 

Letter  of  Franz  Grillparzer  to  Adolf  Foglar,  November  1, 
1870. 

The  Turkish  Empire  is  in  its  last  stage  of  ruin,  and  it  cannot  be 
doubted  but  that  the  time  is  approaching  when  the  deserts  of 
Asia  Minor  and  of  Greece  will  be  colonized  by  the  overflowing 
population  of  countries  less  enslaved  and  debased.     .     .     . 

Shelley,  A  Philosophical  View  of  Rejorm  (1820,  printed  1920), 
p.  26. 

Austria  be-  In  THE  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  the  history 

fore  1867  q{  Austria  has  to  do  largely  with  contests  against  France 

on  the  one  hand  and  contests  with  the  Turks  on  the 
other.  After  the  downfall  of  Napoleon  and  the  decay  of 
the  Ottoman  Empire  the  activities  of  the  Austrian  Govern- 
ment were  directed  principally  to  maintaining  the  restored 
system  in  Europe  and  Austria's  primacy  among  the  Ger- 
man peoples.  After  her  defeat  in  1866  Austria  settled 
her  most  pressing  domestic  difficulties  by  admitting  the 
Hungarians  to  partnership  with  her  German  citizens  in 
the  government,  and  forming  the  Dual  Monarchy.  Shut 
out  from  Germany  and  expelled  from  Italy  now  she 
turned  her  attention  and  ambitions  from  the  north  and 
the  west  to  the  south,  and  dreamed  of  enlarging  her  do- 

304 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     305 

minion  and  expanding  her  power  down  the  Adriatic  and 
down  through  the  Balkans  to  the  -^gean.  For  more  tlian 
a  generation  she  was  sueeessfiil,  espeeially  as  she  luid  in- 
creasing support  from  the  German  Empire  as  time  went 
on ;  so  that  she  added  to  the  number  of  her  subject  Slavs, 
and  continued  to  increase  her  influence  in  Balkan  affairs. 
In  all  this  her  great  rival  was  Russia,  with  whom  at  last 
she  came  into  fatal  collision  over  one  of  the  Balkan  states. 
In  the  Great  War  which  then  began  she  encountered  ir- 
remediable destruction. 

By  the  Ausgleich  or  Compromise  of  18G7  Hungary  was  ThuAus- 
put  on  a  footing  of  complete  equality  with  Austria,  and  6Jeich,  1867 
given  entire  control  over  her  internal  affairs.  There  were 
now  two  states,  each  with  its  own  ministry,  its  owti  parlia- 
ment, and  its  own  officials.  They  were  to  have  one  flag  and 
a  single  ruler,  who  was  to  be  emperor  of  Austria  and  king 
of  Hungary.  Thus  they  were  to  be  united.  But  they  were 
also  to  be  united  with  respect  to  affairs  concerning  them 
jointly,  such  as  war,  finance,  and  foreign  affairs,  by  a 
joint  ministry  of  three  parts,  these  "ministries"  to  be 
supervised  by  "delegations,"  or  committees  of  the  two 
parliaments,  meeting  together  alternately  in  Vienna  and 
Budapest. 

This  remarkable  system  of  dual  government,  whieli  Success  of 
seemed  strange  enough  to  peoples  more  uniform  and 
united,  lasted  successfully  for  half  a  century,  and  was  not 
destroyed  until  the  Great  War  broke  it  to  pieces.  It 
was,  indeed,  a  very  successful  solution  of  the  difficult 
problem  of  holding  together,  under  one  government,  two 
peoples  not  like  enough  to  unite  completely,  and  not  strong 
enough  to  go  their  own  separate  way.  Its  greatest  defect, 
as  was  afterward  clearly  seen,  was  that  it  erected  a 
system  of  dualism  in  an  empire  where  there  were  three 
important  races,  not  two.  Hungarians  and  Germans 
were  largely  content,  but  the  more  numerous  Slavs  were 
not.     Indeed,  the  Ausgleich  was  an  arrangement  whereby 


the  Aus- 
gleich 


306 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Discord  and 
progress 


DiflBculties 
under  the 
Ausgleich 


a  minority,  the  Germans  in  Austria,  allied  themselves 
with  a  minority,  the  Magyars  in  Hungary,  to  hold  in 
subjection  the  more  numerous  Slavs  whom  they  ruled. 
And  in  after  years  it  was  to  be  seen  that  the  Slovaks,  the 
Jugo-Slavs,  and  the  Rumanians  were  just  as  discontented 
with  the  Dual  Monarchy  as  ever  the  Magyars  had  been 
before  the  Ausgleich  was  granted. 

The  domestic  history  of  Austria  during  the  period  1867- 
1914  was  one  of  poHtical  discord  and  much  discontent  on 
the  part  of  the  subject  peoples,  but  withal  much  advance 
in  prosperity  and  material  greatness.  The  Industrial 
Revolution,  which  had  for  a  generation  been  changing 
central  Europe,  went  forward  in  the  Dual  Monarchy  as 
in  the  new  German  Empire,  though  it  was  far  eclipsed  by 
the  mighty  progress  there.  Railway  communications 
were  developed  and  great  factories  arose  in  Austria  and 
Bohemia,  bringing  industrial  prosperity  for  part  of  the 
people.  During  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century 
also  agriculture  in  the  fertile  plain  of  Hungary  was  devel- 
oped as  never  before  there,  until  Hungary  became  one  of 
the  great  wheat-producing  districts  of  Europe.  Further- 
more, public  improvements  were  made,  and  education 
was  fostered,  not  as  in  Germany  and  in  France,  yet  so  far 
that  Austria-Hungary  was  one  of  the  progressive  coun- 
tries of  Europe. 

The  domestic  politics  of  all  this  period  were  concerned 
with  the  relations  between  the  two  partners  in  the  Dual 
Monarchy,  and  then  with  the  relations  between  each  one 
of  them  and  the  subject  peoples  whom  they  ruled.  By  the 
Ausgleich  Austria  and  Hungary  were  joined  together 
under  an  agreement  which  was  arranged  for  ten  years. 
Accordingly,  once  in  a  decade  the  arrangement  was 
brought  forward  for  renewal,  and  on  each  occasion  there 
was  more  strain  and  confusion  than  a  presidential  election 
caused  in  the  United  States.  Each  time  it  was  neces- 
sary to  renew  or  rearrange  commercial  relations  and  decide 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     307 

about  apportionment  of  contril)ution.s  to  suj)port  the 
general  government.  Austria  continued  her  inchistrial 
development,  while  Hungary  remained  for  the  most  part 
an  agricultural  district.  There  was  accordingly  between 
the  two  of  them  the  same  difference  that  had  once 
existed  between  the  North  and  the  South  before  the 
American  Civil  War.  In  the  Monarchy,  however,  the 
interests  of  both  were  subserved  by  putting  protective 
tariff  duties  upon  foreign  manufactures  for  the  benefit 
of  Austria,  and  protective  duties  upon  foreign  agricultural 
products  to  benefit  Hungarian  proprietors.  The  propor- 
tion to  be  contributed  by  each  for  joint  expenditure 
caused  much  difficulty.  By  the  first  Aii.sgleich  treaty 
Austria  was  to  give  70  per  cent,  and  Hungary  30  per  cent., 
but  forty  years  later  Hungary's  share  was  increased  to 
36.4  per  cent.,  she  having  meanwhile  enjoyed  much  ad- 
vantage. More  furious  were  the  disputes  which  raged 
about  the  question  of  the  army.  Like  France,  Austria- 
Hungary,  after  the  defeat  by  Prussia,  adopted  the  system 
of  compulsory  military  service.  Since  unity  was  deemed 
necessary  in  the  making  of  strong  military  power,  the 
authorities  at  Vienna  declared  that  German  should  be  the 
language  of  command  throughout  the  army;  but  the 
Hungarians  sternly  insisted  that  their  language  should  be 
used  for  the  troops  which  Hungary  furnished.  This  ques- 
tion threatened  at  times  to  destroy  the  Ausgleich,  and  in 
1897  it  was  not  possible  to  come  to  any  agreement.  The 
use  of  German  was  enforced,  however,  by  decree  of  the 
emperor-king.  Meanwhile,  recruiting  and  the  appointing 
of  oflBcers  were  left  to  the  governments  of  the  two  parts. 

During  all  of  this  time  the  two  partners  were  held  to- 
gether because  people  in  Austria  and  in  Hungary  saw  that 
the  two  countries  could  not  easily  stand  alone  in  the  midst 
of  their  hostile  subjects  and  surrounded  by  more  powerful 
neighbors.  There  were  always  many  differences  between 
them;  and  at  times  disputes  were  so  furious  and  bitter 


Renewing 

the 

Ausgleich 


Language  of 
command  in 
the  army 


Ties  con- 
necting Aus- 
tria and 
Hungary 


308 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Need  of 

mutual 

support 


The  end  of 
the  House 
of  Hapsburg 


Death  of 

Franz 

Joseph 


that  to  outsiders  it  seemed  impossible  for  them  to  live  to- 
gether longer;  but  always  the  fundamental  need  of  associa- 
tion remained  and  was  well  understood.  Furthermore, 
there  was  a  strong  connecting  link  in  the  person  of  Franz 
Josef,  emperor  of  Austria  and  king  of  Hungary.  Per- 
sonal qualities  and  the  continuance  of  a  long  reign  made 
him  popular  in  both  parts  of  his  domain,  and  a  long  train 
of  personal  misfortunes  endeared  him  to  his  subjects  still 
further.  Much  about  his  character  and  motives  remains 
ill  understood,  but  the  series  of  strange  and  terrible 
calamities  which  came  to  him  made  him  the  most  ro- 
mantic and  pathetic  of  all  the  great  figures  of  Europe. 

He  came  to  his  throne  young  and  in  the  midst  of  the 
disasters  of  1848.  Not  many  years  later  he  lost  in  wars 
with  France  and  with  Prussia  the  Italian  provinces,  which 
seemed  then  his  brightest  possession,  and  the  position  of 
leadership  in  Germany  which  Austria  had  so  long  had. 
The  State  was  constituted  anew,  and  much  prosperity 
came  to  it.  But  in  the  year  after  the  disastrous  war  with 
Prussia,  his  brother,  Maximilian,  who  had  been  made 
emperor  of  Mexico  by  France,  and  then  deserted  on  the 
intervention  of  the  United  States,  was  captured  by  the 
enraged  Mexicans  and  shot  as  a  conspirator  against  them. 
In  1889  his  only  son,  the  Archduke  Rudolph,  died,  sup- 
posedly by  suicide,  in  the  midst  of  mysterious  and  romantic 
circumstances  never  entirely  cleared  up.  Eight  years 
after  this  the  emperor's  wife,  the  beautiful  Elizabeth, 
from  whom  he  had  long  been  estranged,  was  stabbed  to 
death  by  an  anarchist  at  Geneva.  Finally,  after  the 
fates  had  dealt  with  his  house  as  in  some  olden  tragedy 
of  Greece,  his  nephew,  the  Archduke  Franz  Ferdinand, 
heir  now  to  the  throne,  was  assassinated  at  Sarajevo  in 
Bosnia,  In  1916,  during  the  war  which  followed  hard 
on  this  deed,  the  aged  emperor,  who  had  survived  all  the 
members  of  his  house,  passed  away  just  before  his  empire 
was  destroyed. 


o 

B 

P 

< 

o 


809 


310 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Parts  of  the 
Dual  Mon- 
archy 


The  govern- 
ment of 
Austria 


In  the  Dual  Monarchy  the  Empire  of  Austria  included 
the  archduchies  of  Upper  Austria  and  Lower  Austria,  the 
kingdoms  of  Bohemia,  Dalmatia,  and  Galicia,  and  the 
various  districts  of  Bukowina,  Carinthia,  Carniola,  Istria, 
INIoravia,  Salzburg,  Styria,  and  Trieste.  The  Kingdom  of 
Hungary  included  Hungary,  Transylvania,  and  Croatia- 
Slavonia.  The  total  area  of  Austria  was  116,000  square 
miles,  a  little  less  than  the  territory  of  the  Kingdom  of 
Hungary,  which  was  125,000.  In  1910,  at  the  time  of  the 
last  census,  the  population  of  Austria  was  28,000,000 
while  that  of  Hungary  was  21,000,000.  The  total  popula- 
tion, including  that  of  Bosnia-Herzegovina — which  was 
annexed  to  Austria-Hungary  jointly,  in  somewhat  the 
way  that  Alsace-Lorraine  had  been  made  a  Reichsland 
in  the  German  Empire— was  51,000,000.  Of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  Monarchy  a  fifth  were  Germans  and  a  little 
less  than  a  fifth  were  Magyars.  The  remaining  popula- 
tion embraced  a  diversity  of  peoples.  In  Austria,  besides 
the  Germans,  there  were:  West  Slavs  (Czechs)  in  Bohemia 
and  Moravia;  West  Slavs  (Poles)  and  Little  Russians 
(Ruthenians)  in  Gahcia ;  Rumanians  in  Bukowina;  Itahans 
in  the  Trentino;  and  South  Slavs  (Slovenes)  in  Carniola. 
In  Hungary,  besides  the  Magyars,  were  the  Rumanians  of 
Transylvania,  West  Slavs  (Slovaks)  in  the  north,  and 
South  Slavs  (Serbs  and  Croatians)  in  Croatia-Slavonia  in 
the  south.  The  population  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina 
was  entirely  Jugo  (South)  Slavic. 

By  the  constitutional  laws  of  1867  the  government  of 
Austria  was  vested  in  the  emperor  and  in  the  Reichsmth 
(imperial  assembly),  a  parliament  composed  of  two  houses, 
a  house  of  lords  consisting  of  peers  hereditary  or  appointed 
by  the  emperor  for  life,  and  a  house  of  representatives, 
consisting  of  members  elected  at  first  by  the  provincial 
diets  or  assemblies,  but  after  1873  chosen  directly  by  a 
narrow  electorate.  The  franchise  was  widened  by  an 
electoral  reform  in  1896,  and  in  1907  equal  and  direct 


\USTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     311 


ood  sufTrage  was  established.  'I'lie  government,  was 
I  on  by  ministers,  responsible  to  the  Rcirhsndh  in 
cneory,  but  aetually  dependent  mostly  on  the  emperor. 
He  was  also  easily  able  to  eontrol  the  licir/i.srafJi,  (jf  which 
the  upper  house  was  extremely  eonservative  and  arist(j- 
eratic,  and  the  lower  divided  among  numerous  polilieal 
parties  and  constantly  torn  by  bitter  racial  disputes. 

The  general  policy  of  the  Austrian  Government  was  the 
maintenance  of  the  power  and  privileges  of  the  (jerman 
inhabitants  who  had  brought  together  the  parts  and  long 
been  the  masters.  Out  of  28,000,000  inliabitants  they 
numbered  only  10,000,000;  and  with  the  development  of 
greater  national  feeling  in  the  different  parts  their  task 
became  constantly  harder.  Some  local  self-government 
was  granted  to  the  different  parts,  but  not  enough  to 
satisfy  the  local  populations.  The  Czechs  of  Boliemia 
had  long  wanted  an  autonomy  like  that  which  had 
been  granted  to  the  Hungarians,  and  often  in  their  fury 
and  disappointment  they  adopted  such  tactics  in  the 
Ahgeordnetenhaus,  the  lower  chamber  of  the  Reichsrath, 
that  the  uproar  and  confusion  made  it  impossible  for  any- 
thing to  be  done.  The  Slovaks  and  the  Soutli  Slavs 
nursed  their  grievances,  and,  in  spite  of  no  little  advance 
in  prosperity,  longed  for  their  freedom.  In  Galicia  the 
Austrian  Government  succeeded  better  than  anywhere 
else,  but  that  was  because  it  conserved  the  privileges 
of  the  Polish  upper  class,  and  so  won  their  good  will,  while 
it  left  the  Ruthenians  and  the  Polish  masses  in  lowly 
condition. 

The  system  of  government  in  Hungary  had  been 
gradually  worked  out  through  a  long  course  of  time,  but  it 
was  founded  directly  upon  a  series  of  laws  passed  during 
the  Hungarian  uprising  in  1848,  suppressed  as  soon  as  the 
uprising  failed,  but  guaranteed  in  1807  when  the  Aus- 
gleich  was  agreed  on.  It  was  vested  in  the  king  of 
Hungary,  who  was  emperor  of  Austria,  and  exercised  by 


Peoples  in 
Austria 


The  govern- 
ment of 
Hungary 


312 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


In  the  hands 
of  the 
Magyars 


General 
character   of 
govern- 
ment in  the 
Dual  Mon- 
archy 


Foreign 
policy 


his  ministers  who  were  responsible  to  a  parhament.  This 
parHament  consisted  of  an  upper  aristocratic  house,  the 
Table  of  Magnates,  most  of  them  hereditary  noblemen,  and 
a  lower,  the  Chamber  of  Deputies,  consisting  of  members 
almost  all  of  whom  were  elected  from  Hungary  proper  by 
a  narrow  electorate  rigidly  limited  by  property  quali- 
fications. This  electorate  was  so  arranged  as  to  keep 
power  altogether  in  the  hands  of  the  10,000,000  Hungar- 
ians, who  were  a  little  less  than  half  of  the  entire  popula- 
tion. Local  self-government  was  given  to  the  subject 
peoples  in  Hungary,  the  Rumanians  of  Transylvania,  and 
the  South  Slavs  of  Croatia-Slavonia,  more  grudgingly  than 
the  Germans  of  Austria  gave  it  to  the  peoples  in  their 
portion. 

Altogether,  in  the  Hapsburg  Monarchy  while  govern- 
ment was  modelled  on  the  British  system  of  ministers 
responsible  to  a  parliament  dependent  on  the  people, 
such  government  was  actually  established  only  in  small 
part.  In  Hungary  most  of  the  people  had  no  voice  in 
electing  representatives,  and  until  1896  this  had  been  the 
case  in  Austria  also.  In  both  parts  of  the  Dual  Monarchy 
government  was  in  the  hands  of  ministers  controlled  by 
the  crown,  and  a  bureaucracy,  cumbersome  and  ineffi- 
cient, also  dependent  on  the  crown. 

The  foreign  policy  of  Austria-Hungary  during  this 
period  had  to  do  with  ambitions  in  the  Balkans  and  at- 
tempts to  extend  to  the  south.  With  the  new  German 
Empire  cordial  relations  were  soon  established.  With 
respect  to  Italy  the  old  ambitions  were  completely  given 
over.  In  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century,  while 
other  European  powers  were  making  themselves  greater  by 
colonial  expansion,  the  Dual  Monarchy  hoped  to  reach 
southward  along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic  and 
down  through  the  Balkans  to  an  outlet,  perhaps  at  Salon- 
ica.  As  early  as  the  War  for  Greek  Independence  it 
was  evident  that  Austria  and  Russia  were  suspicious  of 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     313 


each  other  in  rivalry  over  the  Balkans.  This  was  more 
apparent  in  1877,  when  the  Russo-Turkish  War  began. 
In  the  next  year,  at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  when  Russia 
was  forced  to  let  a  great  part  of  what  she  had  aofoiiiplished 
be  undone,  Austria-Hungary  was  given  the  achniiiislration 
of  the  two  Turkish  provinces  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina, 
peopled  with  South  Slavs,  and  conveniently  adjoining  her 
own  Slavic  provinces  of  Dalniatia  and  Croatia-Slavonia. 
In  the  following  year  she  joined  the  German  Empire  in 
alliance,  from  which  she  got  added  protection  against 
Russia,  though  Germany  was  not  yet  disposed  to  forfeit 
the  friendship  of  Russia. 

Year  by  year  the  rivalry  of  Austria-Hungary  and 
Russia  for  greater  power  and  influence  in  the  Balkans  in- 
creased, and  the  small  countries  which  had  recently  arisen 
from  the  decay  of  Turkey  were  the  scene  of  continued 
plots  and  intrigue.  In  1897  an  agreement  was  made 
between  Austria  and  Russia,  and  their  "superior  interest" 
in  the  provinces  of  European  Turkey  was  recognized  by 
the  Great  Powers.  About  that  very  time,  however,  began 
the  new  direction  of  German  policy  which  tended  toward 
expansion  in  Asiatic  Turkey,  and  which  therefore  sup- 
ported Austria-Hungary.  The  two  powers  now  worked 
together  in  close  understanding,  for  predominant  influence 
in  the  Balkans  and  at  Constantinople,  for  the  gradual  ex- 
clusion of  Russia,  and  the  connecting  of  the  German- 
planned  Bagdad  Railway  with  the  road  running  from 
Constantinople  to  Vienna  and  Berlin.  The  first  great 
clash  came  in  1908-9  when  the  Dual  INIonarchy  annexed 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  in  defiance  of  Russia,  who 
yielded  to  German  threats.  Four  years  later  came  the 
Balkan  Wars  in  \\hich  Germany  and  Austria  lost  influence 
and  prestige,  since  in  the  first  war  they  favored  Turkey 
and  in  the  second  Bulgaria,  both  of  whom  were  completely 
defeated.  It  was  partly  because  they  were  trying  to 
recover  what  had  been  lost  that  the  ultimatum  was  sent 


Rivalry  with 
Russia 


Austria- 
Hungary, 
Russia,  and 
the  Balkans 


314 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Dual 
Monarchy 
and  the  Bal- 
kan States 


Neighbor- 
ing South- 
Slavic 
states 


to  Servia  in  1914,  which  occasioned  the  conflict  that 
shattered  German  power  and  destroyed  the  Austro- 
Himgarian  state. 

It  was  not  merely  ambition  but  sound  poHcy  that 
caused  statesmen  of  the  Dual  Monarchy  to  take  interest 
in  Balkan  afl'airs.  As  the  Ottoman  Empire  had  shrunk 
and  decayed  in  Europe  part  of  the  South  Slavic  and 
Rumanian  people  whom  Turkey  ruled  were  incorporated 
in  Austria  and  in  Hungary,  while  part  of  them  afterward 
shook  off  the  sultan's  yoke  and  set  up  independent  states 
for  themselves.  In  Transylvania  and  Bukowina  there 
were  more  than  3,000,000  Rumanians,  while  in  Rumania, 
just  across  the  Carpathian  Mountains,  there  were  8,000,000 
more.  In  the  southern  provinces  of  the  Monarchy  just 
before  the  war  there  were  7,000,000  Jugo-Slavs,  while 
across  the  border  in  Montenegro  and  Servia  there  were 
5,000,000.  Once  these  people  had  been  glad  to  escape  the 
Turkish  yoke  by  being  taken  into  the  Austrian  dominions, 
and  now  in  the  Dual  Monarchy  they  had  no  little  pros- 
perity and  progress.  But  meanwhile,  Rumania  and  Servia 
had  grown  up,  and  in  course  of  time,  as  the  Ruman  and 
South  Slavic  subjects  of  Austria-Hungary  saw  themselves 
treated  as  inferiors  and  debarred  from  equal  rights,  they 
began  to  yearn  for  the  day  when  they  might  be  united 
with  their  brethren.  Thus  the  statesmen  of  the  Dual 
Monarchy  saw  it  threatened  with  disintegration.  Just 
before  the  Great  War,  it  is  said,  the  ill-fated  Archduke 
Franz  Ferdinand  cherished  the  scheme  of  admitting  the 
Slavs  to  a  partnership  with  Magyars  and  Germans;  but 
this  plan,  which  would  probably  have  failed  to  cure  the 
ills  of  the  state,  was  never  tried.  Generally  it  had  seemed 
best  to  the  leaders  to  pursue  an  aggressive  policy,  and  try 
to  control  the  small  neighboring  states  in  the  Balkans, 
and  thus  make  it  impossible  to  draw  parts  of  the  Mon- 
archy away.  In  1883  an  alliance  was  made  with  Rumania 
which  became  thus  an  appendage  of  the  Triple  Alliance. 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     315  ^ 

For  some   time  very  friendly  relations  were  established 

with  Servia,  while  Russia  had  great  influence  in  Bulgaria; 

but  after  a  while  Bulgaria  was  drawn  close  to  the  Teutonic 

Powers,  and  Servia  came  under  the  influence  of  Russia. 

For  more  than  a  decade  previous  to  the  Great  War     The  Dual 

Servia  dreamed  of  future  greatness,  to  come  when  the     Monarchy 

I     1         1       •  1        ^°"  Servia 
Dual  Monarchy  broke  up.     She  was  overwhelmed  with 

fury  and  despair  when  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  were 
annexed,  because  she  had  hoped  to  get  them  for  herself, 
but  she  was  compelled  to  submit.  From  that  time  on 
Austria  seemed  resolved  to  make  Servia  completely  sub- 
servient, and  thus,  as  she  thought,  lessen  the  possible 
danger  from  her.  During  the  First  Balkan  War  she 
prevented  Servia  from  getting  an  outlet  on  the  Adriatic 
Sea,  and  in  the  Second  Balkan  War  slie  encouraged 
Bulgaria  to  attack  her.  After  1913  Servia,  stronger  than 
before,  was  also  more  ambitious,  and  altogether  hostile  to 
her  neighbor.  Discontented  South  Slavs  in  the  Dual 
Monarchy  were  encouraged  and  supported  by  Servians, 
until  finally  the  menace  became  a  grave  one.  So  Austria- 
Hungary  resolved  to  reduce  Servia  to  vassalage,  and 
wished  to  attack  her  in  1913.  In  the  next  year  the  assas- 
sination at  Sarajevo  was  ascribed  to  Servian  plotting, 
though  no  proofs  were  ever  given,  and  tlien  the  ultimatum 
was  sent  from  Austria  to  Servia  which  led  straight  to  the 
War  of  the  Nations. 

The  history  of  the  Balkans  in  the  nineteenth  century  is  The  former 
largely  a  story  of  the  disintegration  of  the  Turkish  Em-  greatness 
pire  in  Europe  and  the  establishment  of  separate  states 
from  its  ruins.  The  Turks,  who  two  centuries  before 
had  been  dreaded  by  all  Christian  peoples,  were  now  weak 
and  decadent,  and  would  undoubtedly  have  suffered  the 
fate  of  the  Poles  liad  they  not  been  farther  removed  from 
strong  neighbors,  and  had  the  Great  Powers  not  been  too 
jealous  to  unite  to  despoil  tluMii.  They  had  come  into 
Europe  from  Asia  INIinor  in  the  fourteenth  century.     In 


of  Turkey 


316 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Ottoman 
power  estab- 
lished in 
Europe 


Decline  of 
the  Ottoman 
power 


1361  they  took  Adrianople.  In  1389  they  broke  the 
power  of  Servia;  and  soon  afterward  overran  Bulgaria 
and  ^Yallachia.  A  pitiful  renmant  of  the  Eastern  Roman 
Empire  survived  on  the  Bosporus,  but  in  1453  they  cap- 
tured Constantinople,  which  was  thenceforth  the  center 
of  their  power.  Their  dominion  was  rapidly  extended 
up  through  the  Balkans;  Hungary  was  overrun ;  and  turn- 
ing to  the  east  theyL_siibjected4heJRiissians  and  the  Tar- 
tars along  the  northern  shore  of  the  Black  Sea.  For  a 
while  they  were  the  greatest  naval  power  in  the  world; 
their  galleys  swept  the  eastern  Mediterranean;  they  con- 
quered the  islands  and  much  of  the  north  African  shore. 
In  1571  the  Christian  powers  of  the  west  combined  to 
defeat  them  in  the  great  naval  battle  of  Lepanto,  and 
this  was  in  fact  a  decisive  triumph.  But  for  another 
century  the  Ottoman  power  continued  to  be  mighty  and 
terrible  on  land.  The  king  of  Poland  was  reduced  to  pay 
tribute,  and  in  1683  Vienna  itself  was  besieged  by  a  Turk- 
ish host. 

But  the  foundations  of  this  mighty  structure  presently 
began  to  decay,  and  though  the  edifice  long  stood  erect  in 
apparent  splendor,  it  was  destined  to  collapse  completely. 
Gradually  the  vigor  of  the  rulers  declmed  amidst  the  lux- 
ury and  the  pleasures  of  Constantinople.  The  Janissaries, 
the  terrible  organized  mercenaries,  who  had  so  long  de- 
feated all  their  enemies,  fell  behind  rival  armies  in 
discipline  and  military  equipment,  and  were  finally  able 
to  inspire  terror  only  in  the  Turkish  Government  itself. 
Moreover,  the  Turks  had  never  perfected  any  strong 
organization  in  their  empire.  Always  deficient  in  political 
ability,  they  depended  on  force  and  chicane  for  holding 
together  their  dominions.  Like  the  Mongols  once  in 
Russia,  the  Turks  ruled  their  Christian  subjects  in  the 
Balkans  by  taking  advantage  of  differences  in  race  and 
religion  to  keep  them  apart,  and  by  punishing  them 
savagely  if  they  resisted  or  failed  to  pay  tribute.     They 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     317 


did  not  attempt  really  to  incorporate  the  Servians,  tlie 
Bulgarians,  the  Hungarians,  and  the  Greeks  in  a  compact 
Ottoman  empire,  but  reduced  them  to  serfdom  or  put 
them  under  tribute,  otherwise  leaving  them  largely  to 
themselves,  so  long  as  they  continued  sul)niissive.  Always 
the  Turks  were  a  minority  of  the  population,  and  so  far  as 
they  lived  among  their  subjects  they  lived  as  an  upper, 
ruling  class,  never  winning  atiection  or  loj-alty  or  grati- 
tude from  their  subjects,  and  never  mingling  with  them 
to  form  one  united  people.  Misgovernment  and  oppres- 
sion of  subject  Christians  by  the  Turks  proceeded  less  from 
Turkish  brutality  than  incapacity.  And  it  must  be 
remembered  that  during  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  at  a  time  when  Catholics  in  Ireland  and  Knglaiid 
and  Protestants  in  the  Austrian  dominions  suffered  under 
disabilities  and  persecution,  the  Ottoman  Empire  allowed 
the  greatest  measure  of  religious  freedom  permitted  by  any 
government  in  Europe.  In  Turkey  Christians  exercised 
their  religion,  as  a  rule,  unmolested,  and  were  freely  ad- 
mitted to  hold  office  in  the  State. 

Such  an  empire,  like  the  ancient  empires  of  the  east, 
could  be  held  together  only  so  long  as  its  military  organiza- 
tion remained  strong  enough  to  crush  all  rebellions  within 
and  meet  its  enemies  without.  Diiring  the  .sixteenth  and 
seventeenth  centuries  this  was  sOv  The  turning-point 
car^in  1699,  when  by  the  Treaty  of  Carlowitz  the  Turks 
were  forced  to  yield  their  outlying  possessions  in  Hun- 
gary, in  Transylvania,  on  the  northeastern  Adriatic,  and 
about  the  Sea  of  Azov.  In  the  eighteenth  century  the 
Ottoman  Empire  continued  to  yield  before  Austria  and 
Russia.  In  the  nineteenth  it  began  to  break  up  from 
within. 

In  the  days  of  their  greatness,  after  Constantinople  fell 
and  the  Janissaries  encamped  before  Vienna,  the  Turks 
had  been  a  concern  and  a  danger  to  all  Europe,  though  the 
protection   of  Christian   Europe  usually   fell  to  Austria 


Organiza- 
tion of  the 
Ottoman 
power 


Rapid 
decline 


Rivalry 
concerning 
the  spoils 


318 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Balkan 
Question 


England, 
then  Austria, 
opposes 
Russia 


alone.  During  the  eighteenth  and  nineteenth  centuries, 
while  the  strength  of  the  Turks  was  ebbing,  their  European 
provinces  became  a  great  international  question,  until  at 
last  the  Balkans  were  recognized  as  the  principal  danger 
spot  of  Europe.  This  was  because  of  the  intense  rivalry 
which  arose  for  possession  of  the  spoils.  In  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  especially  under  Catherine 
II,  Russia  expanding  southward  took  the  Turkish  terri- 
torie^^ong  the  north  of  the  Black  Sea,  and  afterward 
threatened  to  go  slowly  forward  until  she  dominated  the 
Balkans  and  arrived  at  Constantinople.  Austria  was 
mu'ch  interested  in  this,  for  already  she  had  many  sub- 
jects who  had  once  belonged  to  Turkey,  and  expected 
to  get  more.  At  first,  however,  she  was  not  greatly  hostile 
to  Russian  expansion,  and  in  17Q.0  an  arrangement  was 
planned  by  which  the  Ottoman  dominions  should  be 
divided  between  Austria  and  Russia.  England,  however, 
already  dreaded  the  appearance  of  a  great  European 
power  on  the  ruins  of  Turkey,  and  exerted  herself  then,  as 
afterward,  to  save  the  Ottoman  state  from  destruction. 

During  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  England 
was  the  principal  supporter  of  Turkey,  and,  along  with 
France,  fought  the  Crimean  War  in  1854  to  save  her  from 
Russian  aggression.  She  intervened  decisively  also  in 
1878,  and  again  saved  Turkey  from  destruction.  But 
after  that  time  Austria  came  more  and  more  to  be  Russia's 
principal  opponent  in  the  Balkans,  dreading,  as  she  did, 
to  see  the  extension  of  Russian  power  southward,  or  the 
bringing  of  the  new  Balkan  states  into  dependence  on  her. 
During  much  of  this  time  either  Russia  or  Austria  would 
gladly  have  taken  the  Ottoman  provinces,  but  failing  that, 
each  was  resolved  that  no  other  power  should  get  them. 
Gradually  it  was  recognized  that  a  European  war  might 
very  easily  grow  out  of  attempted  aggrandizement  by  any 
of  the  great  powers  in  the  Balkans;  and  so,  for  the  most 
part,  the  powers  exerted  themselves  to  preserve  the  Otto- 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     .'519 

man  state.  It  wa.s  due  almost  solely  to  this  that  Turkey 
survived  down  to  ihe  time  of  the  Great  War,  and  owin^  to 
similar  rivalries  and  international  conditions  part  of  her 
has  still  been  allowed  to  remain. 

But  by  1914  only  a  vesti^'e  of  Ottoman  power  remained 
in  Europe.  In  less  than  a  century  she  had  lost  all  her 
possessions  in  Africa,  and  in  Europe  saved  only  a  small 
district  around  Constantinople.  The  principal  steps  in 
the  dismemberment  of  European  Turkey  since  the  time  of 
the  French  Revolution  were:  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople 
between  Russia  and  Turkey  in  1829,  which  ended  the 
War  for  Greek  Independence;  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano 
and  the  Congress  of  Berlm  which  brought  to  an  end  the 
struggle  between  Russia  and  Turkey  in  1877-8;  and  the 
Treaty  of  London,  1913,  which  concluded  the  First  Bal- 
kan W'ar.  All  of  the  crises  that  led  to  these  settlements 
were  brought  about  partly  because  of  misgovernment  and 
oppression  of  Christian  subjects  by  the  Turkish  author- 
ities, partly  because  of  the  indignation  which  tliis  aroused 
either  in  Russia  or  among  the  Balkan  peoples  themselves, 
and  partljTbecause  of  the  desire  of  Russia  or  Austria  at 
first,  and  later  of  the  Balkan  States,  to  seize  for  them- 
selves what  was  slipping  away  from  the  weakening  grasp  of 
the  Turks. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  sub- 
merged peoples  of  Turkey  began  to  seek  their  freedom  at 
the  same  time  that  the  Turkish  dominions  were  beginning 
to  crumble  from  internal  decay.  Ali,  pasha  of  Janina, 
first  made  himself  almost  independent  in  Albania,  then 
as  governor  of  Rumelia  began  to  intrigue  with  foreign 
powers.  In  1804  the  Serbs,  still  under  Turkish  rule,  began 
a  long  struggle  for  their  independence,  and  in  1817  some 
of  them  won  their  autonomy,  thus  laying  the  foundation 
of  the  Servian  kingdom . 

;Meanwhile,  the  Greeks  had  begun  a  struggle  which 
aroused  sympathy  all  over  Europe.     They  had,  indeed, 


The  dis- 
member- 
ment of  Tur- 
key, 1829- 
1913 


The  be- 
ginning of 
Servia 


Revolt  of  the 
Greeks 


320 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Condition  of 
the  Greeks 


The  inde- 
pendence of 
Greece 


been  treated  with  considerable  moderation,  and  in  the 
islands  of  the  Mgean  they  were  already  practically  in- 
dependent.    They  had  retained  their  distinctive  character. 
In  the  Greek  Catholic  Church  they  had  a  strong  organiza- 
tion which  served  to  maintain  their  national  spirit  and 
urge  them  forward  to  obtain  their  independence.     The 
spirit  of  nationality  was  aroused  among  them  early  in  the 
nineteenth  century  by  revived  study  of  the  Greek  classics 
and  recollections  of  the  Hellas  of  old.       In   1814   was 
founded  the  Hetairia  Philike  (friendly  union),  a  secret  so- 
ciety something  like  the  Carho7iari  in  Italy  later  on.     Re- 
volt broke  out  in  1821.     It  was  led  by  Prince  Ypsilanti 
in   the  north   and   by    various    others    of    the    Hetairia 
in  the  Peloponnesus  or  Morea.     The  northern  movement 
was  broken  at  once,  but  in  the  south  the  Greeks  had  com- 
mand of  the  sea,  and  a  long  struggle  inclined  in  their 
favor.     In   1824,  however,  the   sultan  called  to  his  as- 
sistance the  great  pasha,  Mehemet  Ali,  of  Egypt,  and  the 
powerful  fleet  that  was  now  brought  to  the  Turkish  side 
soon  reduced  the  Greeks  to  despair.     Unless  they  could 
get  help  from  abroad  it  was  apparent  that  their  cause  was 
doomed.     Volunteers  from  other  countries,  notable  among 
whom  was  the  English  poet.  Lord  Byron,  enlisted  in  their 
service,  but  were  able  to  accomplish  little  of  importance. 
The  European  governments,  whatever  the  sympathies 
of  their  people,  were  at  first  reluctant  to  intervene,  be- 
cause it  was  clearly  understood  by  Metternich  and  the 
principal  statesmen  then  that   any   disturbance   of    the 
existing  arrangement  might  in  the  end  destroy  what  had 
been  established  by  the  Congress  of  Vienna.     In   1823 
Great   Britain   had   recognized   the   belligerency   of   the 
Greeks,  and  already  the  sympathy  of  the  Russian  people 
had  been   stirred   profoundly;  but  the  only   result   was 
negotiations  which  dragged  on  and  led  to  nothing.    Russia 
wanted  no  independent  Greece,  while  Austria  and  Eng- 
land, fearing  that  a  dependent  Greek  state  would  really 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     321 

depend  upon  Russia,  preferred,  after  a  wliile,  that  the 
Greeks  be  made  entirely  independent.  In  IH^T,  however, 
the  combined  fleets  of  England  and  France,  attempting 
to  enforce  a  truce  between  the  Greeks  and  the  Turks, 
destroyed  the  fleet  of  INIehemet  Ali  at  Navarino.  The 
sultan  now  rashly  declared  war.  Then  a  Russian  army 
entering  the  Balkans  pressed  on  to  Constantinople  itself. 

By  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople  Turkey  |)ra(tioally  ac-  The  Treaty 
knowledged  the  independence  of  Greece,  which  was  defined  o^  Adrxano- 
and  established  at  an  international  conference  in  London 
three  years  later.  At  the  same  time  she  acknowledged 
the  autonomy  of  Servia;  of  Moldavia  and  Wallachia,  the 
Danubian  Principalities,  which  became  a  Russian  pro- 
tectorate; and  gave  up  to  Russia  such  claims  as  she  had  to 
certain  districts  in  the  Caucasus,  which  Russia  afterward 
acquired  for  herself.  Thus  by  the  settlement  of  1829 
Turkey  lost  her  outlying  European  provinces — Greece, 
Servia,  and  what  was  afterward  the  Rumanian  Kingdom. 

The  old  conditions  continued  in  what  was  left  to  her,  for  Revolt  of  the 
in  the  midst  of  the  great  growth  and  changes  of  the  f "^f^^' 
nineteenth  century  the  Turks  changed  almost  not  at  all. 
There  was  the  same  stagnation,  inefficiency,  heavy  op- 
pression, and  lack  of  progress,  and  the  fierce  wildness  of 
the  rude  and  long-oppressed  Christian  population  was 
suppressed  from  time  to  time  by  outbursts  of  fearful 
cruelty  and  destruction.  About  1875  an  insurrection 
broke  out  in  Herzegovina,  a  district  to  the  west  of  Servia, 
peopled  by  Serbs,  but  still  under  Turkish  rule.  \Mnle 
the  rebels  were  being  encouraged  by  the  surrounding 
states,  Montenegro,  Austria,  and  Servia,  in  187G  the 
inliabitants  of  Bulgaria,  a  large  province  east  of  Servia 
and  south  of  the  Danube,  and  so  nearer  to  Constantinople 
and  Turkish  oppression,  rose  against  the  Turks  also. 
Servia  and  Montenegro  declared  war  on  Turkey,  and 
great  sympathy  was  aroused  in  Russia,  many  of  the 
tsar's  subjects  enlisting  to  fight  as  volunteers.     Generally 


1876 


•|     \  R  U  S  S  I  A 

)Budape8t  ^'^  \    ^ 

H  f U     N    G     A     R    Y    -^\moldavia\  \ 


SLAVONI 


17.    THE  BALKANS  IN  1878 
322 


AUSTRIA,    TUKKEY,    BALKANS     323 

the  Turks  were  successful,  hut  llic  IVarl'ul  atrocities  com- 
mitted by  them  upon  the  Hulgarian  jK-asauts  aroused  the 
strongest  indignation  and  horror  in  Europe,  especially 
in  England,  where  Gladstone  declared  that  the  Turks 
must  be  expelled  "bag  and  baggage"  from  Europe,  and  in 
Russia,  which  made  ready  to  intervene. 

In  the  spring  of  1877  Russia  did  begin  war.  Rumania, 
declaring  now  complete  independence,  joined  her,  and  the 
allies  pushing  rapidly  southward  soon  seized  the  passes  of 
the  Balkan  IVIountains  which  were  the  gateway  hi  to  the 
country.  At  Plevna,  in  northern  Bulgaria,  where  a  net- 
work of  highways  converged,  Osman  Pasha,  an  able  Turk- 
ish commander,  fortified  himself  to  oppose  them.  The 
aUies  had  not  sufficient  forces  completely  to  mask  this 
fortress  and  also  advance  against  Constantinople,  but  for 
some  time  they  were  unable  to  take  it.  In  December, 
however,  Plevna  fell,  after  a  memorable  siege.  In  an- 
other month  the  Russians  had  pushed  on  and  taken 
Adrianople,  and  Constantinople  itself  would  have  fallen 
except  for  the  rismg  jealousy  of  Austria  now,  and 
above  all  the  determined  hostility  of  Great  Britain.  None 
the  less,  in  March,  1878,  the  Turks  concluded  with  Russia 
the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  by  which  at  last  was  acloiowl- 
edged  the  complete  independence  of  Montent^gro  and 
Servia,  to  whom  some  territory  was  yielded;  while  almost 
all  of  Turkey's  European  territory,  except  for  a  small  area 
including  Adrianople  and  the  capital  and  another  area  in 
Albania  on  the  Adriatic,  was  given  to  a  new  Bulgaria, 
autonomous  but  tributary  to  the  sultan. 

This  would  have  made  Bulgaria  the  most  important 
state  in  the  Balkans,  and  for  some  time,  doubtless,  she 
would  have  been  largely  dependent  on  Russia.  But 
owing  to  the  efforts  of  Austria  and  Great  Britain  this 
treaty  was  almost  at  once  undone  at  the  Congress  of 
Berlin,  which  reduced  Bulgaria  and  restored  to  the  sultan 
much  of  what  he  had  lost,  though  Bosnia  and  Ilerze- 


The  Russo- 
Turkish 
War,  1877-8 


The  Treaty 
of  San  Ste- 
fano, 1878 


The  Treaty 
of  Berlin, 
1878 


324 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Continued 
decline  of 
Turkey 


Loss  of 
Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina 


Loss  of 
Tripoli 


govina  were  put  under  the  administration  of  Austria- 
Hungary.  The  result  of  this  was  that  Turkey,  though  con- 
siderably reduced,  still  stretched  from  the  Black  Sea  to 
the  Adriatic  Sea  and  still  rested  on  the  Mgean.  She  con- 
tinued to  be  the  foremost  power  in  the  Near  East. 

In  the  generation  that  followed  the  old  conditions 
lasted  on.  The  decline  and  decay  of  Turkey  continued, 
although  after  1876  she  was  ruled  by  Abdul  Hamid,  a  man 
of  sinister  and  evil  reputation,  but  subtle  and  skilful  in 
upholding  Turkey  by  playing  upon  the  rivalries  of  the 
powers.  Meanwhile,  the  new  Balkan  states  were  growing 
in  experience  and  strength,  and  begmning  to  hope  for  the 
day  when  the  complete  break-up  of  the  Ottoman  power 
would  enable  them  to  become  greater  still. 

At  the  end  of  the  century  as  at  the  begmning,  the  decay 
of  the  Turkish  Empire  continued.  As  the  atrophy  pro- 
ceeded all  the  outlying  members  had  dropped  off  or  had 
been  cut  away.  In  the  early  part  of  the  twentieth  century 
nothing  was  left  in  Africa  but  Tripoli;  Arabia  and  other 
districts  in  Asia  no  longer  obeyed  Ottoman  commands;  in 
Europe  Turkish  dominion  had  steadily  shrunk  in  the  Bal- 
kans. In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina;  and  Bulgaria  declared  her  complete  inde- 
pendence. In  1911  Italy — which  had  at  last  acquiesced 
in  French  possession  of  Tunis  and  approved  French 
expansion  in  Morocco,  on  condition  that  France  make  no 
objection  to  Italian  occupation  of  what  was  left  to  take 
east  of  Tunis — suddenly  invaded  Tripoliy  A  long  and 
exhausting  struggle  was  maintained  by  the  tribesmen  in 
their  deserts,  supported  by  officers  from  Turkey,  but  in 
1912  the  Ottoman  Government  was  compelled  to  yield  its 
last  African  possession.  These  incidents  were  of  much 
importance  in  the  changes  of  these  years.  The  German 
Government  strongly  disapproved  of  the  attack  on  its 
friend,  but  could  not  hinder  its  ally.  On  the  other  hand, 
both  England  and  France  encouraged  Italy  and  approved 


Lembergo       V-*i +•+•*■*•♦•+ 

-'~--       -Apodolia  *„         p 

i-'i^.To  Poland  1699^         **■ 
-  <.  W^*-   y>^  *«  7&-  ',        n  ♦ 

Munich    *^  ^■^-v_-'--~-r-v  **♦*    ^^^  -^    "  ""^a^^^TT"'""^    V         t 

AUSTRIA  rHU&GARY    ^.^^^k^,^ 

i  Trie<?te     *"                ^       BANAT 
Venice^     \    A      *  I /><r*-^'\^>J^  §   ,     ^ 

.•■■■••' •':.•.  ^v  --'•"'WALLACHIA      «^  <}>  ^> 3 

BOSNIA/  fit^rafle>  i^„  U  ^  ^v*^   j?^ 

<  ^^  X^2\fr7>*„      '8l'«  L     Pnn.1817  1829 


TUNIS -Turkish  Dependency  1575-1871 
ALGERIA -Turkish  Dependency  15191710 


tmt»At   DBtfTiNC  CO<NC.,N\ 


n      o      c      o      r      fv*"     British  Protectorate     X4> 


18.    THE  OTTOMAN  DOMINIONS:  GREATEST 


Kharkov  o 

s      s 


Greatest  Extent  acquired  during 
"»■+•♦      the  Period  148.11683 
Present  Extent 


T.\T,  successive:  losses,  present  extent 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANvS     325 


her  action,  and  it  was  evident  that  Italy  would  he  loath 
now  to  offend  these  powers  sinee  they  controlled  ab- 
solutely the  Mediterranean,  and  only  with  their  good  will 
could  Italy  keep  her  new  possession.  But  more  than  that, 
the  annexation  of  Bosnia  and  the  seizure  of  Tripoli  opened 
a  new  era,  which  led  directly  to  tlie  Great  War.  Since 
1878  it  had  been  a  recognized  axiom  in  European  politics 
that  in  Turkey  and  the  Balkans  lay  the  great  danger 
of  Europe,  and  that  any  changes  there  were  apt  to  be 
fraught  with  the  utmost  hazard.  It  was  for  this  reason 
that  Turkey  had  been  allowed  to  die  slowly,  with  the 
Great  Powers  fearing  to  meddle,  lest  quarrels  arise  and 
conflict  begin.  But  Austria  had  broken  a  European  treaty 
and  Italy  had  dared  to  make  war  on  Turkey,  regardless  of 
the  effects  so  long  feared,  and  they  had  taken  what  they 
desired.     The  example  was  speedily  followed. 

In  Turkey  the  old  evils  of  misgovernment  continued. 
The  Turks  had  been  brave  and  admirable  soldiers,  and 
under  favorable  circumstances  they  had  revealed  a  char- 
acter pleasant  and  with  noble  traits.  But  they  had  never 
mastered  the  art  of  organizing  and  governing  well.  They 
were  often  tricked  and  deceived  by  their  subjects;  and  in 
last  recourse  their  method  was  usually  nothing  more  than 
to  employ  dull,  stupid,  and  brutal  force,  and  with  the 
greatest  cruelty  compel  submission.  In  the  country  left 
to  them  outside  Constantinople  their  subjects  were  still 
oppressed  with  ruinous  and  ancient  taxes,  held  as  inferiors, 
and  treated  with  contempt.  In  the  western  district,  the 
mountainous  coimtry  of  Albania,  Turkish  authority  was 
defied;  but  in  INIacedonia  and  Thrace  the  people  groaned 
under  grievous  misrule.  The  people  of  Macedonia  were 
Servians,  Greeks,  and  Bulgars,  mingled  together.  They 
often  looked  with  longing  eyes  to  their  brethren  in  Servia, 
Greece,  and  Bulgaria,  over  the  borders;  and  always  the 
governments  of  these  countries,  especially  Bulgaria,  looked 
forward  to  the  day  when,  on  the  dissolution  of  Turkey, 


Conse- 
quences of 
the  seizure 
of  Tripoli 


The  Turks, 
Macedonia, 
and  the 
Balkan 
States 


326 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Disaffection 
and  intrigue 
in  Mace- 
donia 


Causes  of 

the  First 
Balkan  War, 
1912 


these  populations  would  be  incorporated  in  the  greater 
Balkan  states  of  the  future.  Ceaselessly  agents  from 
over  the  border  tried  to  stir  up  the  Christians  of  the  Turk- 
ish country  to  be  ready  for  the  day  of  deliverance,  and  al- 
ways they  tried  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  incorporation 
of  as  many  of  them  as  possible  in  their  respective  countries, 
Servia,  Bulgaria,  and  Greece.  These  three  little  nations 
hated  with  a  great  hatred  the  Turk,  who  had  once  op- 
pressed their  fathers,  but  so  acute  had  their  own  rivalries 
become  that  in  the  earlier  years  of  the  twentieth  century 
they  hated  one  another  still  more.  It  was  accordingly 
an  extraordinary  diplomatic  triumph  and  a  surprise  to  the 
rest  of  Europe,  when,  after  secret  negotiations  early  in 
1912,  Bulgaria,  Servia,  Montenegro,  and  Greece  con- 
cluded an  arrangement  by  which  they  agreed  to  act  to- 
gether. This  agreement,  it  is  believed,  was  largely  the 
work  of  the  Greek  statesman,  Venizelos. 

In  1908  the  Ottoman  Government  had  been  overthrown 
by  a  revolution.  The  new  leaders,  the  Young  Turks, 
strove  to  reform  the  administration  and  restore  the  vigor 
and  power  of  the  State.  Actually,  in  the  end  it  seemed 
that  they  did  more  harm  than  good.  They  soon  under- 
took a  policy  of  nationalization,  attempting  to  assimilate 
their  various  subjects.  So  they  withdrew  privileges  from 
the  Christian  peoples  in  Macedonia,  and  began  bringing 
Mohammedans  in.  This  led  to  disorder,  massacre,  and 
reprisal.  The  Balkan  States  desired  that  this  should 
come  to  an  end.  Apparently  at  first  they  did  not  wish  to 
go  to  war;  but  public  opinion  drove  them  forward.  In 
the  autumn  the  Turks  concentrated  some  of  their  best 
troops  north  of  Adrianople  for  maneuvers,  and  immedi- 
ately the  four  Balkan  States  issued  simultaneous  orders 
for  mobilization,  after  which  the  Turks  ordered  mobiliza- 
tion next  day.  It  was  evident  that  the  little  states  of  the 
peninsula,  encouraged  by  the  example  of  Italy,  were 
really  willing  to  go  to  war.     The  Great  Powers  in  much 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     327 

alarm  endeavored  now,  too  late,  to  prevent  a  conflict. 
October  8  they  issued  a  note  in  which  tliey  condemned 
any  act  leading  to  war,  and  stated  that  if  nevertheless  a 
war  did  break  out  "they  will  not  admit,  at  the  end  of  the 
conflict,  any  modification  in  the  territorial  status  quo  in 
European  Turkey."  But  INIontenegro  immediately  de- 
clared war,  and  her  representative  is  reported  to  have  said 
that  the  Balkan  States  did  not  fear  the  Great  Powers. 
October  14,  Servia,  Bulgaria,  and  Greece  presented 
an  ultimatum  to  Turkey,  and  the  next  day  fighting  began. 
Such  was  the  beginning  of  the  First  Balkan  AVar. 

This  contest  gave  almost  as  great  a  surprise  as  had  tlie 
Franco-German  War.    Turkey  was  known  to  be  in  the  later 
stages  of  decay,  but  the  Turks  had  always  been  brave 
and  steady  fighters,  and,  weak  though  their  state  might  be, 
it  was  supposed  that  their  army,  organized  and  trained 
by  Germany,  was  still  in  fair  shape,  and  it  was  believed  to 
be  superior  to  any  military  force  which  the  Balkan  States 
could  assemble.     But  the  four  Balkan  armies  moved  for- 
ward at  once,  and  struck  a  series  of  terrible  blows  by  which 
the  power  of  Turkey  in  Europe  was  ruined.     The  little 
Montenegrin  army  advanced  to  the  southward  and  laid 
siege  to  Scutari.     The  Servians  defeated  the  Turks  m  the 
great  battle  of  Kumanovo,  overran  part  of  ^Macedonia, 
presently  captured  a  large  Turkish  force  in  the  strong- 
hold of  Monastir,  and  even  crossed  Albania  and  reached 
the  Adriatic  at  Durazzo.     The  Greeks  at  once  got  control 
of  the  iEgean  Sea,  the  task  that  had  been  assigned  them, 
and,  in  addition,  moved  their  army  rapidly  forward,  push- 
ing the  Turks  back  and  driving  some  of  them  into  the 
fortress  of  Janina  and  some  into  the  seaport  of  Salonica. 
Meanwhile,  greater  deeds  were  being  done  by  the  Bul- 
gars.     To  them  had  been  assigned  the  task  of  holding  the 
main   Turkish   forces  in   Thrace.     At  once  they   moved 
down  upon  the  principal  fortress,  Adrianople,  sacred  in 
the  eyes  of  the  Turks,  and  key  to  the  Thracian  plain. 


The  Balkan 
allies  victori- 
ous 


Great  vic- 
tories of  the 
Bulgars 


328 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  London 
Conference 


End  of  the 
First  Balkan 
War 


The  Treaty 
of  London, 
1913 


Near  by  they  encountered  a  Turkish  army,  which  was 
defeated  at  Kirk-Kihsse,  and  driven  from  the  field  in  total 
rout.  A  week  later  they  destroyed  the  military  power  of 
the  Turks  in  a  greater  and  more  desperate  battle  at  Liile 
Burgas.  Thrace  was  now  cleared,  and  the  Bulgarians, 
moving  swiftly  on  in  triumph,  were  stopped  only  by  the 
fortifications  of  the  Tchataldja  lines,  which  protect  Con- 
stantinople, and  had  in  days  of  need  long  before  stayed 
other  invaders  from  the  north.  Here  the  Bulgars  were 
halted. 

The  general  result  was  that  within  six  weeks  Turkish 
power  in  Europe  had  been  destroyed.  The  Turks  had 
been  defeated  in  the  principal  battles  and  had  lost  com- 
mand of  the  sea.  The  relics  of  their  forces  had  been 
driven  down  upon  Constantinople  or  were  hopelessly  shut 
up  in  the  beleaguered  fortresses  of  Adrianople,  Scutari, 
and  Janina.  The  Turks  asked  for  an  armistice,  and  a 
peace  conference  assembled  in  London. 

This  conference  between  the  Turks  and  their  foes  was 
soon  broken  off,  and  at  the  beginning  of  February  hostili- 
ties were  again  begun.  The  Bulgarian  troops  at  Tcha- 
taldja were  not  able  to  force  the  Turkish  lines  and  take 
Constantinople,  but  no  more  were  the  Turks  able  to 
drive  them  away.  Meanwhile,  the  Greeks  took  Janina, 
and  the  Bulgars  Adrianople.  The  Great  Powers  had  al- 
ready proposed  mediation,  and  April  19  an  armistice  was 
signed.  At  the  end  of  May  a  treaty  was  made  whereby 
an  Albania  was  to  be  constituted  by  the  powers,  and  the 
Turks  were  to  keep  a  small  district  outside  of  Constanti- 
nople; otherwise  what  had  belonged  to  Turkey  in  Europe 
was  to  go  to  the  victorious  Balkan  states.  This  would 
probably  meet  the  wishes  of  Greece  and  Bulgaria,  provided 
they  could  agree  among  themselves,  but  it  debarred  Servia 
and  Montenegro  from  getting  a  great  part  of  what  they 
had  expected,  on  the  shores  of  the  Adriatic,  in  Albania. 
Servia  yielded,  because  of  the  injunctions  of  the  Great 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS    329 

Powers  and  because  she  hoped  for  compensation  else- 
where; but  Montenegro,  bent  on  having  possession  of 
Scutari,  continued  the  siege  of  that  mountain  stronghold, 
and,  defying  the  wishes  of  the  powers,  after  prodigies  of 
valor  her  soldiers  took  it.  Presently,  however,  the  threats 
of  the  powers  compelled  her  to  give  it  up  again. 

A  second  Balkan  war  soon  followed.  This  struggle  The  Second 
was  directly  the  result  of  the  decision  of  the  powers  not  to  Balkan  War, 
permit  Servia,  Montenegro,  or  Greece  to  take  territory  in  ^^^^ 
Albania,  and  this  had  been  done  because  of  the  insistence 
of  Austria  that  an  Albania  should  be  maintained.  It  harl 
in  the  first  place  seemed  almost  inconceivable  that  the 
Balkan  states  with  their  bitter  rivalries  would  be  able  to 
act  in  alliance,  but  they  had  carefully  agreed  beforehand 
what  each  one  should  have,  provided  they  defeated 
Turkey,  and  it  is  possible  that  if  there  had  been  no  inter- 
ference they  might  have  divided  the  spoils  without  fight- 
ing. Now  that  it  was  forbidden  to  touch  Albanian  terri- 
tory, however,  Servia  demanded  that  the  agreement  of 
1912  be  revised  so  that  she  would  have  compensation 
elsewhere.  A  week  later  this  was  refused.  Savage  fight- 
ing had  already  broken  out  between  Bulgarians  and 
Servians  and  Greeks.  At  the  end  of  June,  suddenly,  with- 
out any  declaration  of  war,  the  Bulgarian  armies  attacked 
the  Servian  and  the  Greek  forces,  and  a  few  days  later 
Montenegro,  Servia,  and  Greece  declared  war  on  Bul- 
garia, so  recently  their  ally. 

It  is  probable  that  Bulgaria  had  been  encouraged  by  Bulgaria 
the  Teutonic  powers  to  resist  the  Servian  request,  and  it  crushed 
is  certain  that  thej^  expected  her  to  win  an  easy  victory, 
just  as  they  had  expected  a  Turkish  triumph  the  preceding 
autumn.  But  again  they  were  grievously  mistaken. 
Neither  the  Greeks  nor  the  Serbs  were  overwhelmed, 
but  began  driving  the  Bulgars  back  before  them. 
While  this  struggle  was  being  waged,  with  inconceivable 
atrocities  on  both  sides,  the  doom  of  Bulgaria  was  sealed 


19.    THE  BALKANS  IN  1913 
330 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS    331 


by  the  sudden  action  of  the  Rumanian  Government. 
Rumania  had  just  seen  all  the  Balkan  states  except  herself 
make  lar^^e  ^ains  in  territory  and  power.  She  now  sud- 
denly demanded  that  Bulgaria  cede  her  a  strij)  of  terri- 
tory on  her  southern  border.  AMien  this  was  refused  the 
powerful  Rumanian  army  was  moved  down  upon  the 
Bulgarian  capital  while  the  Greeks  and  the  Serbs  were 
advancing  from  otlier  sides.  Nor  was  this  all.  The 
Turks,  seeing  the  difficulty  in  which  Bulgaria  was,  re- 
occupied  Adrianople.  All  hope  was  at  an  end,  and  the  king 
of  Bulgaria  threw  himself  upon  the  mercy  of  his  foes. 

Li  August  the  stern  Treaty  of  Bucharest  was  imposed, 
by  which  Bulgaria  lost  most  of  what  her  great  victories 
had  gained  from  the  Turks;  Rumania  took  that  which  she 
had  demanded;  and  Servia  and  Greece  got  the  territories 
which  they  had  taken  in  the  First  Balkan  War,  while 
Bulgaria  was  engaging  the  main  Turkish  forces.  It  was 
said  at  the  time  that  this  treaty  would  lead  to  other  wars 
in  the  future.  Bulgaria  was  left  greatly  weakened,  but 
also  burning  with  a  sense  of  wrong  and  evidently  waiting 
for  the  day  when  she  might  strike  a  blow  at  Rumania,  or 
Servia,  or  Greece,  to  have  revenge,  and  get  back  the  terri- 
tory which  they  had  taken,  in  which,  indeed,  a  large  part 
of  the  population  was  Bulgarian.  Little  mercy  was 
shown  her,  but  she  herself  had  cynically  refused  any  gene- 
rosity in  the  brief  moment  of  her  greatness. 

The  result  of  the  two  Balkan  wars  w^as  that  to  Turkey 
in  Europe  there  was  left  only  Constantinople  and  a  small 
area  of  territory  northward.  Steadily  the  state  sank 
lower  and  lower  into  feebleness,  decrepitude,  and  ruin, 
while  foreign  capitalists  and  diplomatic  agents  came  in  to 
intrigue  and  control.  Turkey  had  drifted  away  from  the 
old  friendship  with  Britain  and  became  more  and  more 
dependent  on  the  Germans.  Early  in  the  Great  War 
she  was  brought  into  the  struggle  to  aid  Germany  almost 
like  a  vassal  state. 


The  Treaty 

ofBucharest, 

1913 


The  relics  of 
the  Ottoman 
state 


332 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Montenegro 


Servia,  1817, 
1878 


Rival 
dynasties 


Of  the  Balkan  countries  the  oldest  was  Montenegro, 
whose  hardy  population  of  rude  mountaineers  had  never 
been  entirely  conquered  even  when  the  Turkish  dominions 
extended  far  to  the  north  of  their  district.  Her  bold  war- 
riors carried  on  constant  war  with  the  Turks,  supporting 
themselves  by  their  herds  and  their  flocks,  by  rude  tillage, 
and  by  forage  for  plunder,  as  the  Scottish  highlanders  once 
had  done.  Her  complete  independence  was  formally 
acknowledged  by  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  and  by  the 
Congress  of  Berlin  in  1878.  The  people  were  Serbs, 
closely  related  to  the  population  of  Servia.  Because 
of  the  conditions  of  their  life  only  slight  material  progress 
was  possible.  Owing  to  the  good  offices  of  England 
an  outlet  was  procured  for  them  in  1880  on  the  Adriatic, 
at  Dulcigno.  The  government  was  in  theory  a  constitu- 
tional monarchy,  but  actually  the  prince  was  a  patriarch 
and  leader  of  a  tribal  people. 

Next  in  age  was  Servia,  who  attained  autonomous  gov- 
ernment in  1817,  this  autonomy  being  recognized  more  for- 
mally in  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople  in  1829.  Her  freedom 
came  after  a  long  contest  with  the  Turks.  In  1804  the 
struggle  was  begun  by  a  peasant  leader,  Kara  (Black) 
George,  the  father  of  Servian  independence.  After  suc- 
cessful guerilla  warfare  in  the  mountains  he  completely 
overwhelmed  the  Turks  at  Mischoz  in  1806.  For  a  few 
years  the  Turks  granted  virtual  autonomy,  but  when 
Russia,  the  patron  of  the  Balkan  Slavs,  was  occupied  in 
the  great  struggle  with  Napoleon,  the  sultan  again  re- 
duced the  country.  Presently,  however,  the  Servians 
rose  under  another  peasant  leader,  Milosh  Obrenovitch, 
and  Russia  being  free  to  intervene  again,  the  sultan 
yielded  once  more. 

The  circumstances  of  the  Servian  war  of  liberation  were 
unfortunate  in  that  freedom  was  won  through  the  efforts 
of  two  leaders,  both  of  whose  families  now  desired  to  rule 
the  country.     The  result  was  that  the  country  was  torn 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     333 


by  family  find  dynastic  disputes  niiicli  like  the  feuds  of 
Irish  princes  in  the  Middle  A^es.  In  a  country  of  peas- 
ants, where  tribal  instincts  were  still  very  strong,  it 
would,  in  any  event,  have  been  difficult  to  avoid  this. 
In  1817  Kara  George  was  assassinated  so  that  the  Obre- 
novitch  family  might  rule.  This  was  avenged  in  18(58 
when  Michael  III  was  assassinated  by  partisans  of  the 
Karageorgevitch  house,  and  in  1903  wlien  they  murdered 
Alexander  and  his  queen.  The  Obrenovitch  dynasty  was 
now  extinct,  and  the  throne  came  finally  into  the  posses- 
sion of  the  House  of  Kara  George. 

In  foreign  relations  Servia  long  remained  dependent  on 
Austria,  with  whom  she  made  an  alliance  in  1881.  Austria 
supported  and  protected  her  in  her  rash  war  with  Bulgaria 
in  1886,  in  which  she  was  badl}^  defeated  at  Slivnitsa.  But 
at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  eight  years  before,  Austria- 
Hungary  had  been  given  the  administration  of  Bosnia  and 
Herzegovina,  in  which  dwelt  a  large  part  of  the  Servian 
race.  As  time  went  on  Servia  greatly  hoped  some  day 
to  obtain  these  provinces  for  herself.  Accordingly,  the 
friendship  with  Austria  gradually  cooled,  and  Servia, 
getting  more  and  more  under  Russian  influence,  strove  to 
free  herself  from  economic  dependence  on  her  neighbor 
to  the  north.  In  1908,  when  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina 
were  annexed  by  the  Dual  Monarchy,  and  the  last  chance 
of  Servia  acquiring  them  seemed  to  have  gone,  the  Ser- 
vians were  filled  with  the  rage  of  despair,  and  apparently 
hoped  to  be  able  to  fight  against  Austria  along  with  Russia 
as  an  ally.  When  Russia  juelded  to  Austria  and  Germany 
together  it  seemed  for  a  moment  that  Servia  would  strike 
by  herself,  but  she  also  yielded  and  was  compelled  to 
accept  what  had  been  done.  In  1912  she  helped  to  form 
the  Balkan  Alliance  which  dismembered  Turkey.  She 
overcame  all  opposition  and  even  obtained  the  long-desired 
outlet  on  the  sea,  at  Durazzo.  But  Austria -Hungary, 
unwilling    that    Servia    should    grow    great    or    have    a 


Servia, 
Austria- 
Hungary, 
and  Russia 


Servia  in 
the  Balkan 
wars 


334 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Domestic 
affairs 


Greece, 
1829-1832 


port  on  the  Adriatic,  compelled  her  to  withdraw  from 
Albania.  She  did,  indeed,  at  this  time  yield  to  Servia  the 
saujak  (province)  of  Novi-Bazar,  which  lay  between 
Servia  and  Montenegro,  and  which  she  had  undertaken 
to  administer  when  she  got  possession  of  Bosnia.  But  the 
Serbs,  deprived  of  the  fruits  of  their  victory,  turned  for 
compensation  to  the  east,  and  this  helped  to  bring  on 
the  Second  Balkan  War.  In  this  struggle  Servia  and 
Greece  defeated  Bulgaria,  and,  as  a  result  of  the  Treaty 
of  Bucharest,  Servia,  although  terribly  weakened,  was 
left  with  greatly  increased  possessions  and  prestige.  In 
1915,  during  the  Great  War,  she  was  destroyed  by  her 
enemies,  but  part  of  her  army  escaped  and  afterward 
assisted  the  Allies  in  their  final  triumph.  As  a  result 
of  this  war  Servia  became  the  leader  of  a  great  federation 
of  South  Slavs,  based  upon  the  eastern  Adriatic  Sea. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  records  the  long, 
slow  rise  of  the  peasants  to  better  economic  conditions. 
The  principal  occupations  of  the  people  were  agriculture 
and  the  raising  of  cattle.  Generally  speaking,  the  land 
was  in  the  hands  of  small  peasant  proprietors,  who  lived  a 
rude,  hard  life,  but  enjoyed  more  economic  independence 
than  most  of  the  peasants  outside  of  France,  and  of  Ireland 
after  the  Land  Purchase  Acts.  The  government  was 
vested  in  a  prince,  until  1882,  when  the  title  of  king  was 
assumed.  There  was  a  legislature,  the  Skupshtina,  and 
for  some  years  before  the  war  a  considerable  measure  of 
constitutional  self-government  had  been  developing.  The 
religion  of  the  people  is  the  Greek  Catholic  faith. 

For  ages  the  fate  of  Greece  has  been  closely  associated 
with  that  of  Turkey  and  the  Balkans.  The  Greeks  ob- 
tained their  freedom  in  1829,  about  the  time  that  the  Serbs 
won  theirs.  When  Turkey  had  abandoned  her  claims,  there 
was  some  delay  about  fixing  the  status  of  the  country.  Rus- 
sia desired  that  Servia  should  have  self-government  but  re- 
main tributary  to  the  sultan;  but  since  it  was  believed  that 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     335 


this  would  make  her  really  dependent  on  Russia,  Austria 
and  England  opposed  it.  Metternieh  was  unwilling  for 
any  assistance  to  be  given  to  the  Greeks;  he  greatly  wished 
to  prevent  the  break-up  of  the  Ottoman  dominions,  and 
hence  some  part  of  the  existing  arrangement  in  Europe; 
but  since  that  had  already  occurred,  he  joined  England 
in  helping  to  establish  Greece  as  a  sovereign  and  indepen- 
dent state.  This  was  done  in  1832  as  the  result  of  an  in- 
ternational conference  in  London. 

In  her  foreign  relations  Greece  was  generally  fortunate. 
England  and  France  occupied  Pira'us  in  IHoO  to  pnvent 
Greece  attacking  Turkey  during  the  Crimean  War;  hut  in 
1862  the  British  Government  gave  her  the  Ionian  Islands, 
which  lay  just  off  the  west  coast,  and  which  England  had 
acquired  during  the  Napoleonic  wars.  By  the  Congress  of 
Berlin  the  northern  boundaries  of  Greece  were  extended, 
and  five  years  later,  after  some  pressure  by  the  powers, 
she  received  parts  of  Thessaly  and  Epirus.  In  1897, 
during  a  rebellion  in  the  large  Greek-inhabited  island  of 
Crete,  Greece  declared  war  on  Turkey,  but  was  at  once 
overwhelmed  and  would  have  lost  some  of  her  territory 
in  the  north  but  for  prompt  intervention  by  the  powers. 
None  the  less,  the  Cretans,  who  had  repeatedly  risen  in 
rebellions  since  the  time  of  the  Greek  War  of  Indepen- 
dence, were  now  given  autonomy  under  Turkey.  In 
1905,  under  their  leader,  Venizelos,  the  ablest  Greek  of  his 
generation,  they  declared  for  union  with  Greece,  and  five 
years  later  the  Treaty  of  London,  at  the  end  of  the  First 
Balkan  War,  brought  this  about.  In  the  First  Balkan  War 
the  Greeks  got  connnand  of  the  sea,  and  occupied  such 
islands  in  the  .Egean  as  Italy  had  not  taken  the  year  be- 
fore, and,  defeating  the  Turkish  armies  opposed  to  them, 
got  the  long-coveted  city  of  Salonica.  In  the  second  war, 
she  helped  Servia  to  defeat  Bulgaria,  and  kept  what  she 
had  won.  In  the  Great  W^ar  Venizelos  would  have  had 
her  join  the  Allies,  but  the  sympathy  of  the  sovereign  was 


Foreign 
relations 


Greece  in 
the  Balkan 
wars 


336 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Domestic 
affairs 


Rumania, 
1829-61-78 


with  Germany,  and  for  a  long  time  Greece  remained  neu- 
tral. The  Allies  presently  occupied  Salonica,  and  in  1917  a 
revolution  drove  King  Constantine  out,  whereupon  Greece 
entered  the  war  with  England  and  France.  In  1920, 
during  the  settlement  of  European  affairs,  by  the  Treaty 
of  Sevres,  Greece  received  considerable  portions  of  Turk- 
ish territory  along  the  ^Egean  and  up  beyond  Adrianople, 
and  also  in  Asia  INIinor. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  during  this  period 
has  no  great  general  interest.  The  people  are  descended 
from  the  ancient  Hellenes,  though  their  forefathers 
mingled  with  the  Slavic  intruders  who  came  into  the 
peninsula  in  the  early  Middle  Ages.  Their  language  is  a 
modification  of  the  Greek  spoken  by  the  countrymen  of 
Aristotle  and  Pericles.  Indeed,  modern  Greek  is  much 
more  like  the  Greek  of  classical  times  than  modern  English 
is  like  Anglo-Saxon.  The  people  belong  to  the  Greek 
Catholic  Church.  The  government  is  a  constitutional 
monarchy.  The  people  have  continued  the  traditions 
of  old  Greece  and  developed  much  commerce  and  ship- 
ping, but  the  country  is  poor  and  opportunity  small,  and 
large  numbers  of  emigrants  have  left  the  homeland.  The 
new  possessions  of  Greece  together  with  the  advantages 
of  her  geographical  position  will  probably  bring  much 
greater  prosperity  and  expansion  in  the  future. 

Rumania  dates  from  about  the  time  when  Greece  was 
established.  By  the  Treaty  of  Adrianople  in  1829  the 
two  Danubian  principalities,  Moldavia  and  Wallachia, 
were  left  under  the  nominal  sovereignty  of  the  sultan,  but 
actually  autonomous  and  largely  dependent  on  Russia, 
who  had  gained  them  their  freedom.  Russian  control 
of  the  country,  which  commanded  the  mouths  of  the 
Danube,  awakened  the  jealousy  of  Austria,  and  in  1856 
at  the  Congress  of  Paris  the  principalities  were  formally 
declared  autonomous  states  under  Turkish  suzerainty  and 
the  Russian  protectorate  abolished.     At  the  same  time 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     337 

Bessarabia,  formerly  an  eastern  part  of  Moldavia,  lying      The 

across  the  Danube,  and  taken  by  Russia  from  Turkey  in      Danubmn 
.    .        1  ->  r   1  1       •  rr«i  •  Principali- 

1812,  was  joined  to  Moldavia  once  more,  i  he  constitu-  ^^^^  autono- 
ent  assemblies  now  called,  in  the  two  provinces,  declared  mous 
for  union  in  one  state;  but  this  was  opposed  by  En^^land 
who  feared  Russia,  and  by  Austria  who  wanted  no  strong 
Rumanian  state  right  on  the  border  of  her  province  of 
Transylvania  which  was  peopled  by  Rumans.  None  the 
less,  the  people  of  the  two  principalities  proceeded  to 
elect  the  same  prince,  Alexander  Couza,  and  supported 
by  Napoleon  III,  who  shortly  afterward  made  war 
upon  Austria  to  assist  Italian  nationality,  they  were 
united.  The  union  was  sanctioned  by  Turkey  in  1861. 
The  great  reforms  which  Couza  undertook  raised  enemies 
who  drove  him  from  his  throne  five  years  later.  He  was 
succeeded  by  a  German  prince,  Charles  of  Hohenzollern- 
Sigmaringen,  in  whose  long  reign  the  country  went  for- 
ward in  development  and  progress. 

With  Russia  Rumania  made  war  upon  Turkey  in  1877,  Foreign 
and  her  soldiers  won  great  distinction;  but  she  gained 
nothing:  for,  in  the  settlement  that  followed,  Russia  took 
back  Bessarabia  and  gave  the  less  valuable  Dobrudja 
to  the  south,  which  had  just  been  taken  from  Turkey. 
But  the  complete  independence  of  Rumania  was  recog- 
nized by  the  Treaty  of  Berlin,  and  in  1881  her  ruler  as- 
sumed the  title  of  king.  Rumania  took  no  part  in  the 
First  Balkan  War,  but  intervened  decisively  in  the  Second, 
and  by  the  Treaty  of  Bucharest  obtained  a  small  portion  of 
Bulgarian  territory.  During  the  Great  War,  like  Italy 
and  Greece,  Rumania  maintained  neutrality  for  some  time, 
but  in  1916  joined  the  Allies.  After  a  brief  struggle  she 
was  overwhelmed,  and  presently  forced  to  make  an 
ignominious  peace  and  see  her  country  stripped  bare.  Two 
years  later,  however,  her  enemies  were  completely  over- 
thrown, and  in  the  general  settlement  of  European  aflTairs, 
in  Paris,  she  obtained  what  she  had  so  long  hoped  for :  Tran- 


affairs 


338 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Domestic 
affairs 


Agrarian 
reforms 


sylvania,  Romania  Irredenta,  and  proceeded  to  take  back 
Bessarabia  also. 

The  domestic  history  of  the  country  reveals  steady 
development  and  increase  in  material  prosperity.     Even 
before  her  latest  acquisitions  Rumania  was  the  largest 
and  most  populous  of  the  Balkan  States;  she  was  rich  in 
resources,  one  of  the  great  wheat-  and  oil-producing  dis- 
tricts of  Europe,  and  she  had  a  trade  almost  as  great  as 
that  of  all  the  other  Balkan  States  combined.     After  the 
Treaty  of  St.  Germain  (1919)    and   the  taking  of  Bes- 
sarabia her   size   was  nearly   doubled,   and   she  became 
greater  and  more  important  than  her  neighbors,  Austria, 
Hungary,  or  any  of  the  Balkan  States.     Rumania  w^as 
free  from  the  uprisings  and  violent  overturns  that  inter- 
fered with  the  development  of  neighboring  states.     Con- 
stitutional  monarchy   was   established   but   a   restricted 
franchise  kept  control  in  the  hands  of  the  upper  classes. 
Under   their  prince,  Alexander   (1859-1866),  a  series  of 
notable  reforms  was  made;  the  property  of  the  monaster- 
ies was  confiscated,  and  part  of  the  holdings  of  the  great 
landowners  was  sold  to  the  peasants,  who  at  the  same 
time  were  relieved  of  the  more  onerous  of  the  feudal  or 
manorial  obligations.     These  changes,  which  were  carried 
through  just  about  the  time  when  Alexander  II  was  mak- 
ing his  great  reform  for  the  Russian  serfs,  partly  failed  in 
the  end  largely  for  the  same  reasons  as  in  Russia.     The 
amount  of  land  given  to  the  peasants  was  small,  and  since 
the  population  increased  rapidly,  after  a  while  the  amount 
was  altogether  insufiicient.     Furthermore,   some  of  the 
feudal  obligations  were  left  upon  the  peasants,  such  ob- 
ligations  lingering   in   Rumania   longer   than    anywhere 
else  in  Europe.     The  result  was  that  while  the  wealth 
and  prosperity  of  the  country  increased,  it  was  largely  for 
the  upper  classes.     The  mass  of  the  people  were  poor, 
and   agrarian   discontent   was   very   great.     During   the 
period  of  the  Great  War,  however,   large  estates  were 


1878 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     339 

divided  among  the  peasants,  and  universal  suffrage  was 
granted.  Tlie  people  claim  descent  from  Roman  colonists 
of  the  time  of  Trajan,  and  their  language  is  an  offspring  of 
the  Latin;  but  most  of  the  people  arc  Slavic,  and  most  of 
them  adherents  of  the  Greek  Orthodox  Church. 

Youngest  of  the  Balkan  States  was  Bulgaria.  The  TheBulgars 
Bulgars,  hke  the  Serbs,  have  a  long  history.  Both 
of  them  were  formidable  enemies  of  the  Eastern  Roman 
Empire  in  the  days  of  the  Empire's  decline,  and  both 
founded  great  states  in  the  Balkan  peninsula  during  the 
Middle  Ages.  Both  of  them  were  afterward  overwhelmed 
by  the  Turks,  and  spent  long  ages  in  dumb  and  hopeless 
subjection.  Because  of  their  rivalry  and  their  disputes 
the  Turks  found  it  easy  to  conquer  them  and  afterward 
play  them  off  against  each  other. 

In  1876,  following  the  uprising  of  the  people  of  Ilerze-  ^^l^"^^' 
govina,  Bulgarian  peasants  rose  against  their  Turkish 
masters.  The  revolt  was  easily  suppressed,  but  it  was 
suppressed  with  such  crueltj^  that  all  Europe  was 
aroused.  The  "Bulgarian  Atrocities,"  as  the  massacres 
were  called,  awakened  a  storm  of  indignation  in  Europe. 
In  1877  Russia  declared  war  on  Turkey.  She  was  moved 
partly  by  ambition  to  extend  her  influence  toward  Con- 
stantinople, but  she  was  aroused  also  because  of  the 
sincere  sympathy  of  the  Russian  people  for  their  kinsmen 
in  the  midst  of  the  horrors  which  they  were  enduring. 
Joined  by  Rumania,  she  quickly  destroyed  Turkey's 
power,  and  by  the  Treaty  of  San  Stefano  stripped  her  of 
nearly  all  her  possessions  in  Europe.  This  territory  was 
mostly  given  to  a  new  Bulgarian  state,  autonomous 
though  tributary  to  the  sultan,  which  would  now  have 
been  the  most  powerful  state  in  the  Balkans.  But 
this  arrangement  was  not  allowed  to  stand.  The  entire 
Balkan  question  was  soon  dealt  with  by  a  European 
congress  which  met  at  Berlin.  By  the  Treaty  of  Berlin 
in  1878  the  Bulgarian  country   was  divided  into  three 


340  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

parts,  the  southernmost,  Macedonia,  wliich  contained 
many  Bulgarians,  was  left  to  the  Turks;  the  middle  part. 
Eastern  Rumelia,  was  made  an  autonomous  province 
under  a  Christian  governor,  but  was  to  be  under  the  direct 
authority  of  Turkey  in  mihtary  and  political  matters; 
the  northern  part  was  made  into  the  autonomous  prin- 
cipality of  Bulgaria  tributary  to  the  sultan.  Part  of  this 
enforced  division  of  the  Bulgarian  people  was  soon  undone. 
In  1885  Eastern  Rumelia  joined  Bulgaria.  Greece  and 
Servia  were  unwilling  to  see  their  new  rival  strengthened, 
and  Servia  suddenly  attacked  her.  But  the  Bulgars 
completely  defeated  their  enemies  at  SHvnitsa,  and  the 
union  was  then  assured. 
The  King-  The  first  ruler  of  the  country  was  a  German,  Prince 

dom  of  Alexander  of  Battenberg,  but  after  a  troublous  reign  of 

Bulgaria,  seven  years  he  withdrew  from  the  country.     Presently 

another  German,  Prince  Ferdinand  of  Saxe-Coburg,  was 
chosen.  For  some  years  the  country  was  directed  by 
the  one  great  statesman  whom  Bulgaria  has  produced, 
Stephen  Stambulov,  in  whose  time  Bulgaria  threw  off  the 
tutelage  of  Russia  and  made  herself  truly  independent. 
The  young  nation  constantly  grew  in  strength  and  pres- 
tige, and  in  1908,  at  the  time  when  Austria  annexed  the 
two  Turkish  provinces,  the  Bulgarian  prince  cast  off 
all  Turkish  allegiance  and  proclaimed  the  mdependent 
Kingdom  of  Bulgaria. 
Misfortune  Four  years  later  Bulgaria  was  the  principal  member  in 

in  war  j-^e  Balkan  coalition  which  destroyed  Turkish  power,  and 

after  her  armies  had  everywhere  gained  great  triumphs 
she  found  herself  in  possession  of  the  province  of  Thrace 
down  beyond  Adrianople.  But  in  the  next  year,  unwilling 
to  compromise  with  her  allies,  she  attacked  Servia  and 
Greece.  She  did  not  succeed  in  defeating  them,  and 
while  they  were  driving  her  back  the  Rumanians  suddenly 
came  down  from  the  north,  while  the  Turks  took  back 
Adrianople.     Bulgaria   was   forced  to  make  abject  sub- 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS     341 


mission,  and  by  the  Treaty  of  Bucharest  yielded  some  of 
her  own  territory  to  Rumania,  and  lost  nearly  all  she  had 
gained  in  the  First  Balkan  War.  It  was  partly  to  get 
revenge  and  partly  to  undo  the  settlement  of  Bucharest 
that  tlie  Bulgarians  joined  the  Teutonic  powers  in  1915  and 
helped  to  destroy  first  Servia  then  Rumania.  But  in 
1918  she  was  the  first  to  surrender  to  the  Allies,  and  the 
war  left  her  poverty-stricken,  ruined,  and  bare. 

The  origin  of  the  Bulgarians  is  not  certainly  known. 
Like  the  Magyars  and  the  Finns  they  are  apparently 
Asiatic  intruders  in  Europe,  but  they  are  nmch  mixed 
with  Slavic  people,  and  speak  a  Slavic  language.  Their 
religion  is  the  Greek  Catholic,  but  they  have  an  inde- 
pendent church,  the  Bulgarian  Exarchate.  The  prin- 
cipal industry  is  agriculture,  and  the  Bulgars  constitute 
a  state  of  small,  sturdy,  free,  independent  peasant  pro- 
prietors. The  government  is  a  constitutional  monarchy, 
under  a  king  and  a  parliament,  the  Sohranjey  elected  by 
the  people. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Austria-Hungary,  general:  H.  W.  Steed,  W.  A.  Phillips,  and 
D.  A.  Hannay,  SJiort  History  of  Ausiria-H ungary  and  Poland 
(1914) ;  H.  W.  Steed,  The  Ilapshurg  Monarchy  (2d  ed.  1914),  best, 
by  the  Vienna  correspondent  of  the  London  Times;  J.  A.  von 
Ilelfert,  Geschichte  Oesierreichs  von  Ausgange  des  Wiener  October 
Ausstandes  181^8,  4  vols.  (1869-86),  the  best  work  on  the  period. 

Biographies  and  memoirs:  E.  von  Wertheimcr,  Graf  Julius 
Andrassy,  3  vols.  (1910-13);  F.  F.  von  Beust,  Aus  Drei  Viertel- 
jahrhnnderten,  2  vols.  (1887). 

The  parts  of  the  Dual  Monarchy:  Bertrand  Auerbach,  Les 
Races  et  les  Nationalitis  en  Aidriche-Hongrie  (1898);  A.  R.  and 
Mrs.  E.  M.  C.  Colquhon,  The  Whirlpool  of  Europe,  Austria- 
Hungary  and  the  Hapsburgs  (1907);  Geoffrey  Drage,  Austria- 
Hungary  (1909);  R.  W.  Seton-Watson,  Racial  Problems  in 
Hungary  (1908),  Corruption  and  Reform  in  Hungary  (1911), 
The  Southern  Slav  Question  and  the  Hapsburg  Monarchy  (1911), 
excellent;  Josef  Ulrich,  Das  Oesterreichischc  Staatsrecht  (3d  ed. 
1904),  best  on  the  subject;  Alexandre  de  Bertha,  La  Hongrie 


The  Treaty 
of  Bucharest 


Bulgaria  a 

peasant 

state 


342  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Moderne,  1849-1901  (IWl),  La  Constitution  Hongroise  (1898); 
R.  Sieghart,  ZoUtrennung  und  Zolleinheit  (1915),  for  the  economic 
relations  between  Austria  and  Hungary;  E.  Denis,  La  Boheme 
depui.s  la  Moniagne-Blanche,  2  vols  (1903). 

Austria-Hungary  and  the  Balkans:  A.  Beer,  Die  Orientalische 
Politik  Oesterreichs  seit  1774.  (1883);  T.  von  Sosnosky,  Die 
Balkanpolitik  Osterreich-Ungarns  seit  1866,  2  vols.  (1913);  A. 
Fournier,  ]Vie  Wir  zu  Bosnien  Kamen  (1909);  D.  S.  Koyitch, 
L' Annexion  de  la  Bosnie-Herzegovine  et  le  Droit  International 
Public  (1912);  Ferdinand  Schmid,  Bosnien  und  die  Herzegovina 
untcr  der  Verwaltung  Oesterreich-Ungarns  (1914). 

The  Ottoman  Empire:  W.  Miller,  The  Ottoman  Empire,  1801- 
191S  (1913),  for  a  good  introductory  account;  W.  E.  D.  Allen, 
The  Turks  in  Europe  (1919);  B.  G.  Baker,  The  Passing  of  the 
Turkish  Empire  in  Europe  (1913);  B,  Bareilles,  Les  Turcs,  Ce 
Que  Fut  Leur  Empire,  Leurs  ComSdies  Politiques  (1917);  V.  Be- 
rard,  Le  Sultan,  l' Islam,  et  les  Puissances  (1907) ;  W.  E.  Curtis, 
The  Turk  and  His  Lost  Provinces  (1903);  S.  Goriainov,  Le  Bos- 
phore  et  les  Dardanelles  (1910),  based  on  studies  in  the  Russian 
archives;  A.  Vicomte  de  la  Jonquiere,  Ilistoire  de  V Empire  Otto- 
man, 2  vols,  (3d  ed.  1914),  the  second  volume  contains  the  fullest 
account  of  Turkey  since  1870;  "Odysseus"  [Sir  C.  N.  E.  Eliot], 
Turkey  in  Europe  (1908),  excellent  and  suggestive;  R.  Pinon, 
L'Europe  et  VEmpire  Ottoman  (1913).  For  accounts  of  life  in 
Constantinople:  H.  S.  Edwards,  Sir  W.  White,  Ambassador  at 
Constantinople,  1885-1891  (1908);  Sir  E.  Pears,  Fortij  Years 
in  Constantinople  (1916),  excellent.  Life  of  Abdul  Hamid  (1917). 
For  the  Turkish  revolution:  G.  F.  Abbott,  Turkey  in  Trans- 
ition (1909);  C.  R.  Buxton,  Turkey  in  Revolution  (1909). 

The  Eastern  Question:  Edouard  Driault,  La  Question  d'Orient 
depuis  Ses  Origines  jusqua  Nos  Jours  (1898,  7th  ed.  1917),  best; 
Die  Balkanfrage,  ed.  by  M.  J.  Bonn  (1914) ;  M.  Choublier,  La 
Question  d'Orient  depuis  le  TraitS  de  Berlin  (1897);  S.  P.  H. 
Duggan,  The  Eastern  Question — a  Study  in  Diplomacy  (1902) ;  T. 
E,  Holland,  The  European  Concert  in  the  Eastern  Question  (1885) ; 
J.  A.  R.  Marriott,  The  Eastern  Question  (1917) ;  M.  I.  Newbegin, 
Geographical  Aspects  of  Balkan  Problems  in  Their  Relation  to 
the  Great  European  War  (1915);  R.  Wyon,  The  Balkans  from 
Within  (1904);  R.  W.  Seton-Watson,  The  Balkans,  Italy,  and 
the  Adriatic  (1915). 

The  Balkan  Wars:  V.  Berard,  La  Macedmne  (2d  ed.  1900) 
H.  M.  Brailsford,  Macedonia:  Its  Races  and  Their  Future  (1906) 
Andre  Cheradame,  Douze  Ans  de  Propagande,  1900-1912  (1913) 


AUSTRIA,    TURKEY,    BALKANS      343 

L.  E.  Gueschoff,  U Alliance  Balkaniqnc  (1015),  trans.  The  /Bal- 
kan League  (191.5),  contains  important  documents  and  first- 
hand information;  G.  Younj^,  Nationalism  and  War  in  the  Xcar 
East  (1915).  For  the  mihtary  operations:  J.  G.  Schurman, 
The  Balkan  Wars,  1912^-1913  (1914);  nej)ort  oj  the  International 
Commission  to  Inquire  info  the  Causes  and  Conduct  oj  the  Balkan 
Wars  (Carnegie  Endowment  for  International  Peace,  1914j; 
ElHs  Ashmcad-Bartlett,  With  the  Turks  in  Thrace  (1913); 
Hermengild  Wagner,  With  the  Victorious  Bulgars  (1913);  D.  J. 
Cassavetti,  Hellas  and  the  Balkan  Wars  (1914);  K.  Nicolaides, 
Griechenlands  Ariteil  an  den  Balkankriegen,  1912-13  (1914). 

Greece:  Sir  R.  C.  Jebb,  Modern  Greece  (2d  ed.  1901);  Ivcwis 
Sergeant,  Greece  in  the  Nineteenth  Century  (1897);  George  Fin- 
lay,  History  of  the  Greek  Revolution  (1877),  best  on  the  subject; 
P.  F.  Martin,  Greece  of  the  Twentieth  Century  (1913);  R.  A.  H. 
Bickford-Smith,  Greece  Under  King  George  (1893);  X.  Nicolaides, 
Les  Grecs  et  la  Turquie  (1910);  C.  Kerofilas,  Eleutherios  Venizelos 
(trans,  by  B.  Barstow,  1915);  V.  E.  Berard,  Les  Affaires  de 
Crete  (2d  ed.  1900). 

The  Balkan  States:  W.  S.  Murray,  The  Making  of  the  Balkan 
States  (Columbia  University  Studies,  XXXIX,  no.  1,  1910), 
scholarly;  William  Miller,  The  Balkans:  Roumania,  Bulgaria, 
Servia,  and  Montenegro  (2d  ed.  1908). 

Montenegro:  P.  Coquelle,  Histoire  de  Montenegro  et  de  la 
Bosnie  depuis  les  Origines  (1895) ;  F.  S.  Stevenson,  A  History  of 
Montenegro  (1912). 

Servia:  H.  W.  V.  Temperley,  History  of  Serbia  (1917),  best  in 
English;  V.  Georgevitch,  Die  Serhische  Frage  (1909);  Prince  and 
Princess  Lazarovich-Hrebelianovich,  The  Servian  People,  Their 
Past  Glory  and  Their  Destiny,  2  vols.  (1910);  W.  M.  Petrovitch, 
Serbia,  Her  People,  History,  and  Aspirations  (1915) ;  V.  Ratchich, 
Le  Royaume  de  Serbie:  Etude  d'llistoire  Diplomatique  (1901); 
Gregoire  Yakschitch,  L^Europe  et  la  Resurrection  de  la  Serbie, 
lS0-hl83J^  (1907). 

Rumania:  Oscar  Brilliant, /?o?/7na?H'a  (1915);  Nicolae  Jorga, 
Geschichte  des  Rumdnischen  Volkes,  2  vols.  (1905);  D.  Mitrany, 
Roumania,  Her  History  and  Politics  (1915);  Andre  Bellesort, 
La  Roumanie  Contemporaine  (1905). 

Bulgaria:  A.  Chaunier,  La  Bulgarie  (1909);  Edward  Dicey, 
The  Peasant  State:  an  Account  of  Bulgaria  in  1S94  (1894) ;  Guerin 
Songeon,  Histoire  de  la  Bulgarie  depuis  les  Origines  jusqud  Nos 
Jours  (1913);  A.  H.  Beaman,  M.  Stambuloff  (1895). 


CHAPTER  XIII 


Rome  and 
the  comple- 
tion of 
Italian  unity, 
1870 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   AND   THE   LESSER 
STATES 

Sono  celebri  le  parole  pronunziate  da  Bismarck  al  1879,  che  I'ltalia 
non  era  una  potenza  milltare  temibile  .  .  .  Oggi  tutto  e 
mutato  in  nostro  vantaggio  ed  io  non  permettero  che  I'ltalia 
ritorni  in  quello  stato  di  umiliazione.     .     .     . 

Francesco  Crispi  to  Commendatore  Ressman,  September  2, 

1890. 

El  partido  liberal  espanol,  sin  culpa  suya,  por  culpa  de   otros,   es  el 
partido  liberal  mas  avanzado  que  hay  en  toda  Europa. 
Es  necesario,  completamente  necesario,   que  la  monarquia  his- 
torica  espanola  se  una,  se  confunda,  se  aligue  con  el  partido  de- 
mocratico  historico  espanol. 

Speech  of  Emilio  Castelar,  July  12,  1883. 

If  this  is  the  day  of  great  Empires  it  is  also  preeminently  the  day  of 
little  nations.  .  .  .  Their  destiny  is  interwoven  with  that  of 
humanity. 

Speech  of  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  September  6, 1917. 

The  unification  of  Italy  was  completed  with  the  tak- 
ing of  Rome  in  1870.  This  acquisition  was  one  of  the  con- 
sequences of  the  Franco-German  War.  Napoleon  HI, 
who  had  had  so  much  to  do  with  making  possible  the 
establishment  of  the  ItaHan  nation,  by  the  help  which 
he  gave  to  Sardinia  against  the  Austrians  in  1859,  had  not 
expected  the  work  to  be  carried  as  far  as  it  was,  and  viewed 
with  displeasure  the  appearance  of  a  new  great  state  on 
the  southern  border  of  France.  Moreover,  the  powerful 
Catholic  party  in  France,  then  very  active  and  aggressive, 
was  deeply  offended  at  the  taking  by  the  new  state  of 
most  of  the  territories  of  the  pope  in  1860.  Partly  to 
appease  them  and  gain  their  good  will,  Napoleon  HI 

344 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER    STATES     345 

occupied  Rome,  still  in  the  pope's  possession,  with  French 

troops.     Soon  after  the  beginning  of  the  war  with   the 

Germans  these  troops  were  withdrawn,  Rome  was  occupied 

by   Italian   forces,   and   the   capital   of  the   Kingdom   of 

Italy,  which  had  first  been  at  Turin,  then  in  1805  had  been 

removed  to  Florence,  was  now  brought  to  Rome. 

The  government  of  the  state  was  based  on  the  Htaiido     The  govern- 

fondamentale    del    Regno,    which    had    been    granted    l)y     '"^"^  °^  ^® 
^,,       ,        4 ,,  p  ,,       I-    •      /TT     I  1  •  1  •  •"        Kingdom    of 

Charles  Albert  oi  hardmia  (1  ledmont)  to  his  subjects  m      j^^^jy 

1848,  and  later  extended  to  the  other  districts  as  they 
were  added  to  Sardinia  to  make  the  new  kingdom.  In 
course  of  time  the  Statuto,  while  not  changed  or  amended, 
was  enlarged  and  overlaid  by  much  supplementary  legisla- 
tion and  with  custom  having  the  force  of  law.  By  virtue 
of  this  constitution  Italy  became  a  monarchy,  with  a 
government  of  the  model  of  England  or  Fr;nK-c,  where 
the  authority  was  vested  in  a  parliament,  of  two  houses, 
with  an  executive,  the  ministry,  responsible  to  it.  The 
franchise  was  at  first  restricted  by  rigid  property  and 
educational  qualifications,  so  that  only  one  person  in 
forty  could  vote.  A  great  extension  was  made  in  1882, 
while  in  1912  a  reform  was  made  by  which  manhood  suf- 
frage was,  in  effect,  introduced. 

The  extending  of  the  franchise  in  Italy  was  long  de-     Vatican  and 
layed  and  much  hampered  because  of  the  illiterac}-  of  a      Quirinal 
large  part  of  the  population,  especially  in  the  south.     The 
effective  working  of  the  government  was  long  impeded     itaiy 
by  the  hostility  of  the  pope.     AMien  Rome  and  the  little 
strip  of  territory  around  it  were  occupied  in  1870,  it  was 
not  the  purpose  of  the  Italian  Government  to  drive  the 
pope  away  or  to  interfere  with  him  as  pope.      Cavour's 
ideal  had  been:  libera  chiesa  in  siato  libera  (a  free  church 
in  a  free  state).     Next  year  the  Italian  Parliament  passed 
the  Law  of  Papal  Guarantees,  still  in  force,  which  guaran- 
teed the  pope's  sovereignty,  possession  of  the  Vatican  and 
other  places,  and  a  large  pension  in  perpetuity.     Pius  IX 


Church  and 
State  in 


346 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Prisoners  of 
the  Vatican 


Improve- 
ments nec- 
essary for 
union  and 
progress 


refused  to  accept  this,  hoping  that  the  lost  temporal  pos- 
sessions of  the  Church  would  be  returned  to  him,  and  as 
late  as  1914  Benedict  XIV  expressed  hope  that  this  would 
be  brought  about.  The  popes  refused  to  take  the  pen- 
sion, and  remained  in  voluntary  isolation,  "prisoners" 
in  the  Vatican.  As  the  years  went  by  and  no  Catholic 
power  restored  to  the  Papacy  what  had  been  lost,  the 
popes  tried  to  thwart  and  obstruct  the  Italian  authorities. 
In  1883  the  decree  Non  expedit  (not  expedient)  declared 
it  not  well  for  Catholics  to  vote  at  parliamentary  elections 
or  to  hold  office  under  the  Italian  Government;  and  in 
1895  a  further  decree,  Non  licet  (not  allowable),  proclaimed 
that  the  Church  forbade  these  things.  The  trend  of  ideas 
in  the  nineteenth  century  was  such  that  there  were  numer- 
ous Catholics  who  no  longer  considered  it  well  for  the 
Church  to  be  a  temporal  power,  who  conceived  its  func- 
tions to  be  purely  spiritual  and  ecclesiastical,  and  who 
therefore  had  no  hostility  toward  the  Italian  Government 
because  of  the  seizure  of  the  papal  states.  Accordingly, 
the  orders  of  the  popes  concerning  Italian  politics  were 
by  no  means  generally  obeyed.  The  strongest  impulse  in 
Italy  continued  to  be  the  fervent  feeling  of  patriotism 
awakened  during  the  great  years  of  unification.  The 
Catholic  population  was  divided  by  a  conflict  between 
nationalism  and  the  Church,  Many  had  no  hesitation  in 
zealously  supporting  the  government;  many,  more  scrupu- 
lous and  obedient,  heeded  the  behests  of  the  Church. 

Huge  tasks  confronted  the  new  state.  The  effects  of 
the  weakness,  the  misery,  the  oppression  of  the  centuries 
past,  were  not  to  be  made  up  at  once  by  any  device. 
Especially  in  the  south,  so  long  weighed  down  under  the 
oppressive  tyranny  of  the  Bourbons,  there  were  old  condi- 
tions surviving,  poverty,  illiteracy,  ignorance,  that  it 
would  take  much  to  overcome  and  remove.  In  this 
southern  part  there  were  no  railroads  yet,  ecclesiastics 
and  rulers  there  having  long  considered  them  to  be  works 


ITALY,  SPAIN,  LESSER  STATES     347 


of  the  devil,  good  communications  hud  not  yet  l)een 
opened,  and  manufactures  were  utterly  wanting.  In  the 
north  there  were  railroads,  good  eonnnuniealions,  and 
flourishing  industrial  cities.  In  this  part  there  was  a 
sturdy  body  of  small  proprietors,  among  whom  the  lands 
had  been  parcelled  out.  In  the  south,  especially-  in 
Sicily,  the  land  was  held  in  large  estates  by  the  nobUs,  as 
in  Russia,  and  as  in  western  Europe  during  the  Middle 
Ages,  worked  by  an  ignorant  and  debased  peasantry.  The 
nation  was  poor  and  taxation  inevitably  opj)ressive;  but 
though  the  south  contributed  least,  it  was  necessary  for  a 
while  that  the  greater  part  of  the  revenue  should  be  spent 
there,  since  the  country  could  not  be  truly  united  until 
the  chief  differences  between  the  northern  and  the  south- 
ern portions  were  done  away  with. 

Considerable  development  followed.  New  railroads 
were  constructed,  manufacturing  extended,  commerce  de- 
veloped. Much  of  this  was  accomplished  in  the  face  of 
difficulties  that  remained  very  great.  The  principal  oc- 
cupation, as  in  France,  was  agriculture,  but  much  of  the 
soil  was  not  rich,  methods  of  cultivation  were  primitive, 
the  peasants  in  the  south  very  backward,  and  the  land 
there  held  in  the  manner  of  the  Ancient  Regime.  It  was 
difficult  to  develop  manufactures  as  Great  Britain  and 
Germany  were  then  doing,  since  Ital}'  was  almost  entirely 
without  iron  and  coal,  and  could  obtain  these  essentials 
only  by  buying  them  at  high  price  abroad.  Italy  had  no 
large  quantity  of  exports  to  send  out,  and  it  was  difficult 
merely  to  develop  carrying  trade  in  competition  with  the 
great  seafaring  nations.  From  a  country  thus  poor  and 
lacking  rich  natural  resources  it  was  necessary  to  raise 
huge  taxes,  partly  to  do  the  necessary  things  long  left 
undone,  and  partly  to  sustain  the  ambitious  foreign  policy 
upon  which  the  country  soon  embarked.  The  taxation 
was  so  crushing  as  to  bow  down  the  |)eople  and  hamper  the 
development  of  business;  yet  for  a  long  time  almost  all 


Conditions 
in  Italy 


Develop- 
ment and 
progress 


Heavy 
taxation 


348 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Increase  of 
population 


Italian  na- 
tionalism 


Italy  enters 
the  Triple 
Alliance 


the  public  revenue  thus  raised  was  devoted  to  paying 
interest  on  the  large  national  debt,  and  to  paying  for  the 
army  and  the  navy.  Notwithstanding  all  these  things, 
and  notwithstanding  that  many  people  could  barely  make 
a  living,  the  birth-rate  was  high  and  the  population  in- 
creased rapidly,  just  as  it  had  under  still  worse  circum- 
stances in  Ireland  in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. In  1914  the  population  of  Italy  was  almost  as  great 
as  that  of  France,  and  nearly  twice  as  large  as  that  of 
Spain,  though  the  area  of  each  one  of  these  countries  was 
twice  as  great  as  her  own.  Italy,  indeed,  like  Japan  at 
the  same  time,  was  unable  to  support  her  rapidly  increas- 
ing numbers.  Accordingly,  there  was  a  large  and  in- 
creasing emigration,  to  the  South  American  countries,  and 
especially  to  the  United  States  where  myriads  of  Italian 
peasants  became  small  farmers,  sellers  of  fruit,  or  did  the 
construction  work  on  railways,  sewers,  and  public  im- 
provements, always  hoping  for  the  day  when  enough 
money  would  be  saved  to  enable  them  to  return  to  the 
beloved  land  of  their  birth. 

It  was  ardent  nationalism  that  made  possible  the 
strong  union  which  was  accomplished  in  Italy.  During 
the  Middle  Ages  Italy  had  been  divided  into  states  as 
completely  self-conscious  and  as  completely  distinct  as 
was  Germany  at  the  same  time;  and  these  divisions  had 
been  maintained  down  into  the  nineteenth  century.  Yet 
when  the  unification  of  the  country  was  brought  about 
a  centralized  nation  state  was  erected,  like  England  or 
France,  whereas  in  the  German  Empire  no  more  than  a 
federal  union  of  the  parts  was  effected.  The  people  also 
were  filled  with  recollection  of  the  greatness  of  Rome  in 
the  past,  and  with  desire  to  have  Italy  important  in  the 
present.  The  Italian  leaders  resolved  to  make  their 
country  a  great  power.  Partly  through  fear  of  France 
and  also  because  of  anger  at  her  course,  and  partly  be- 
cause of  previous  association  with  Prussia,  Italy  joined 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     349 


the  alliance  which  the  German  Empire  and  Austria- 
Hungary  had  made,  and  thus  helped  to  form  the  Triple 
Alliance  (1882).  A  large  army  and  a  large  navy  were 
now  deemed  necessary,  and  the  expense  of  maintaining 
them  not  only  constituted  a  burden  beyond  the  real 
resources  of  the  country,  but  took  a  great  part  of  the  public 
revenue  which  was  sorely  needed  for  education  and  inter- 
nal improvements. 

During  this  time,  while  Italy  was  an  appendage  of  the 
German  alliance,  she  felt  that  she  had  security  from 
France,  and  set  out  to  acquire  a  colonial  empire.  Some 
possessions  were  taken  in  eastern  Africa,  but  when  attempt 
was  made  to  conquer  the  independent  kingdom  of  Abys- 
sinia, the  Italian  forces  suffered  a  crushing  defeat  (1896). 
For  some  years  Italian  colonial  aspirations  remained  in 
abeyance,  until  in  1912,  when  a  great  change  had  come 
over  international  relations,  Italy  suddenly  tried  to  take 
Tripoli  away  from  Turkey.  During  this  time  Italy's  con- 
nection with  her  partners  had  been  growing  weaker  and 
weaker.  The  old  fear  and  suspicion  of  France  seemed 
to  disappear.  On  the  other  hand,  while  relations  with 
the  German  Empire  remained  cordial,  with  the  Dual 
Monarchy  they  never  became  completely  satisfactory. 
In  1866  Italy  had  joined  Prussia  against  Austria,  and 
though  defeated  had  shared  in  the  Prussian  success.  It 
was  then  that  she  had  obtained  Venetia,  rounding  out  her 
possessions  in  the  northeast.  But  at  this  time  not  all  the 
Italian  population  in  this  part  of  Europe  was  given  to 
her,  a  considerable  portion  remaining  under  Austrian  rule 
across  the  Alps  in  the  Trenthio,  at  the  head  of  the  Adriatic 
about  Trieste,  and  scattered  along  the  Dalmatian  shore 
of  the  Adriatic.  Italian  nationalists,  fired  with  patriotic 
feeling,  longed  to  bring  their  brethren  of  this  Italia  Ir- 
redenta into  union  with  themselves.  This  could  never  be 
accomplished,  so  it  seemed,  until  Austria-Hungary  was 
defeated    and     conquered.     Furthermore,    extension     of 


Foreign 
relations 


Italia 
Irreden  ta 


350  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Austrian  power  down  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Adriatic  al- 
ways seemed  threatening  to  Italy,  whose  own  Adriatic 
coast,  low  and  defenceless,  might  lie  helpless  before  the 
naval  power  of  Austria  based  on  the  fortresses  of  the  moun- 
tainous shore  over  the  sea.  Finally,  there  was  in  the 
twentieth  century  a  conflict  of  ambition  between  the  two, 
since  both  Austria-Hungary  and  Italy  desired  to  extend 
their  power  and  dominion  in  the  Balkans.  This  opposition 
gradually  weakened  the  Triple  Alliance,  and  it  was  the 
principal  factor  in  bringing  Italy  into  the  Great  War 
against  the  Teutonic  powers  in  1915. 
Spain:  the  In  1870  the  people  of  Spain  were  in  the  midst  of  troub- 

1873^5*^'  ^^"^   times.     During   the  long   reign  of  Isabella  II  the 

reputation  of  the  Bourbon  dynasty  had  sunk  lower  and 
lower,  until  in  1868  she  was  driven  away  by  a  liberal 
uprising,  and  a  provisional  government  was  set  up  while 
the  revolutionists  sought  a  new  monarch.  It  was  during 
this  search  for  a  sovereign  that  the  crown  was  offered  to  a 
relative  of  the  king  of  Prussia,  thus  causing  the  tension 
between  Prussia  and  France,  the  immediate  occasion  of  the 
Franco-German  War.  In  1871  Amadeo  of  Savoy  accepted 
the  throne,  but  after  two  years  in  the  midst  of  dishearten- 
ing difficulties  he  abandoned  his  attempt  to  rule  the 
country.  In  1873  the  liberals  set  up  a  republic.  This  was 
contrary  to  the  wishes  of  most  of  the  people,  and  Spain  now 
fell  into  the  greatest  confusion.  Order  was  restored  only  by 
the  stern  rule  and  the  military  despotism  of  the  president. 
The  Bour-  Emilio  Castelar.  In  1875  the  Bourbon  line  was  restored 
bons  re-  when  the  son  of  Isabella  was  made  king  as  Alfonso  XII. 

stored,  1875  During  the  ensuing  reign  order  was  maintained  and  the  af- 
fairs of  the  state  were  administered  by  the  conservatives 
with  wisdom  and  success.  On  the  death  of  the  monarch 
in  1885,  and  after  the  birth  of  his  posthumous  son,  Alfonso 
XIII,  in  the  following  year,  the  government  was  adminis- 
tered under  the  regency  of  the  Queen  Mother,  Maria 
Christina,  who  turned  to  the  liberals.     In  1902  the  young 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     351 

kinjE?  came  of  ago.  His  personal  qualities  endeared  liini  to 
liis  su})jeets,  and  despite  great  diffieMJtirs  the  dynasty  still 
keeps  a  hold  upon  the  throne,  though  the  tenure  has  be- 
come more  precarious  each  year. 

Most  of  the  Spanish  people  had  cared  noliiing  for  a  The  govern- 
rcpublic  when  Castelar  was  trying  to  establish  one,  and  ^^^^ 
the  nation  welcomed  back  a  king  with  as  much  delight 
as  the  English  once  received  Charles  II.  A  period  of 
improvement  and  reform  began,  which  slowly  produced 
good  results.  In  187G  a  constitution  was  adopted  which 
in  form  gave  the  people  a  government  like  that  of  Italy  or 
Belgium,  vested  in  the  codes,  or  parliament,  elected  by  the 
people.  In  1890  the  principle  of  manhood  suffrage  was 
adopted  for  electing  members  of  the  lower  house  of  the 
Cortes.  As  in  Great  Britain  the  ministry  is  dependent 
upon  a  majority  in  the  parliament,  and  as  in  France  this 
majority  is  formed  by  a  combination  of  political  parties 
willing  to  act  together.  But  actually  the  Spanish  people, 
for  ages  without  experience  in  self-government,  cared 
little  about  their  government  and  were  utterly  unable  to 
control  it.  Parliamentary  majorities  were  made  by  the 
ministry,  and  a  government  could  always  get  sanction 
from  the  electorate  by  controlling  the  elections.  ]Morc- 
over,  the  extension  of  the  suffrage  in  1890  to  the  mass  of 
the  people  strengthened  the  conservative  and  reactionary 
elements  in  the  state,  especially  the  Church,  since  the 
voters,  many  of  whom  were  illiterate  as  well  as  inex- 
perienced, voted  entirely  at  the  dictation  of  the  priests. 
Nevertheless,  after  1880  a  period  of  reform  began,  in  Reforms 
which  trial  by  jury  was  introduced,  taxation  reformed,  and 
obstacles  removed  from  industry  and  trade,  obstacles 
that  had  survived  in  Spain  longer  than  almost  anywhere 
else  in  Europe.  The  liberal  leader,  Sagasta,  wished  also 
to  improve  education  and  take  it  out  of  the  hands  of  the 
clergy,  and  effect  such  a  separation  of  Church  and  State  as 
was  afterward  brought  about   in   France:  but,  not  with- 


352 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Recent 
conditions 


Portugal: 
past  great- 
ness and 
present 
decay 


standing  that  there  was  considerable  hostihty  to  the 
reHgioiis  orders  because  of  their  vast  wealth  and  posses- 
sions, the  body  of  the  people  supported  the  clericals  and 
enabled  them  almost  entirely  to  prevent  such  changes. 

After  three  centuries  of  decline  and  decadence  there 
were  immense  obstacles  in  the  way  of  recovery,  and  the 
loss  from  those  centuries  was  not  easily  to  be  made  up. 
The  country  was  poor,  agriculture  languished,  there  was 
little  industry  and  not  much  trade.  No  longer  did  great 
quantities  of  gold  come  from  colonies,  for  most  of  them 
had  long  ago  been  lost,  and  those  which  remained  were  a 
burden  and  expense.  Most  of  the  people  were  ignorant 
and  superstitious,  and  more  than  half  of  them  could  neither 
read  nor  write.  Taxation  was  heavj^  and  the  national  debt 
almost  too  great  to  be  borne.  None  the  less,  gradually 
there  has  been  an  improvement  in  the  last  generation. 
"VMiat  appeared  at  first  a  great  disaster,  the  loss  of  most 
of  the  remaining  Spanish  colonies  to  the  United  States 
in  1898,  soon  seemed  a  benefit,  since  it  removed  much 
trouble  and  expense.  Of  late  the  population  has  been 
increasing,  and  wealth  and  prosperity  along  with  it.  The 
land  has  been  getting  more  and  more  into  the  hands  of 
peasant  proprietors,  and  manufacturing  and  commerce 
have  once  more  begun  to  flourish.  The  country  remains 
poor,  and  in  the  midst  of  their  splendid  cathedrals  and 
vast  palaces  the  people  have  memories  of  the  past  more 
than  possessions  in  the  present.  Nevertheless,  Spain, 
once  the  land  of  the  Inquisition,  of  autos  da  fe,  of  proud 
noblemen,  of  innumerable  beggars,  is  coming  to  be  a  land 
of  some  industry  and  prosperity,  and  may  have  a  large 
future  before  her. 

Portugal,  like  Spain,  had  played  her  part  long  before 
the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and,  like  Spain, 
the  best  of  her  heritage  in  1870  consisted  of  glorious  memo- 
ries from  the  past.  For  her  also  the  nineteenth  century 
had  been  a  period  of  weakness,  quietude,  and  decay.  After 


ITALY,  SPAIN,   LESSER   STATES     353 

the   Napoleonic    wars   and  after  the  withdrawal   of  the 
British  troops  who  had  occupied  the  country,  Portugal  was 
the  scene  of  struggles  between  parties  of  progress  and  re- 
action.    No  great  advance  was  made  and  not  niucli  was      Economic 
possible,  for  the  country  had  no  large  national   wealth      stagnation 
and    no   great    industries   or   trade.     Its   finances     were 
hopelessly  tangled,  taxes  were  very  high,  and  the  debt  of 
the  nation  was  large.     Brazil  had  proclaimed  her  inde- 
pendence in  1822,  but  Portugal  still  possessed  a  colonial 
empire,  mostly  in  Africa,  nmch  beyond  her  resources  to 
maintain.     As  time  went  on  her  debt  increased  and  her 
affairs  became  more  embarrassed.     It  was  not  possible  to 
improve  education  or  economic  conditions,  and  most  of  the 
people  remained  poor  and   illiterate,   with   small  under- 
standing of  political  matters  and  no  previous  experience 
in  self-government.     So  the  Portuguese  people,  in  their 
out-of-the-way  corner  of  Europe,  lived  on  in  the  decay  of 
their  country,  in  the  midst  of  monuments  of  departed 
grandeur,  attracting  little  foreign  attention,  except  when 
other  countries,  like  Germany  or  England,  hoped  some  day 
to  inherit  their  colonial  possessions.     It  is  believed  that 
in  1898  Great  Britain  and  Germany  did  make  a  secret 
agreement  about  how  these  possessions  might  be  divided 
between  them  later  on,   if  ever  Portugal  could  be  per- 
suaded to  sell. 

In   1910,   when  the  reigning  dynasty   had   sunk   into     The  Por- 
complete  disrepute,  Manoel  II,  young,  inexperienced,  and     tuguese  Re- 
foolish,  was  driven  from  the  throne  and  a  republic  pro-     P"^'*<^'  ^^^^ 
claimed.     A  constitution  modelled  on  that  of  France  was 
adopted,  providing  for  a  legislature,  the  Cortes,  with  a  minis- 
try responsible  to  it,  and  a  president.     But  it  was  evident 
at   once   that   it   would    take    generations    of    education 
and  training  in   self-government  before  the  Portuguese 
people  could  make  it  work  successfully;  and  the  new  gov- 
ernment had  to  sustain  itself  by  force  and  Ijy  many  of 
the  arbitrary  methods  of  imprisonment  and  suppression 


354 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Greatness 
of  the  Dutch 
Netherlands 
in  the  past 


Decline 


which  had  made  the  monarchy  odious.  Furthermore, 
there  were  violent  disputes  between  the  clericals  and 
friends  of  the  republic,  for  notwithstanding  that  the  entire 
population  was  Roman  Catholic,  the  republican  govern- 
ment at  once  proceeded  to  separate  Church  from  State, 
suppress  the  wealthy  religious  orders,  and  confiscate  what 
they  owned.  It  would  probably  be  long  before  the  settle- 
ment was  complete. 

The  history  of  Holland  in  the  nineteenth  century  was 
mostly  a  record  of  quiet  prosperity  and  of  solid  achieve- 
ment by  a  nation  once  great  but  now  for  a  long  time  small 
in  the  midst  of  mightier  neighbors.  When  after  a  pro- 
longed and  desperate  struggle  during  the  sixteenth  century 
the  Dutch  succeeded  in  winning  their  independence  from 
the  Spanish  crown,  they  had  become  the  greatest  sea  power 
in  Europe.  It  was  their  ships  and  their  command  of  the 
sea,  more  than  anything  else,  that  had  given  them  their 
triumph ;  and  not  only  had  they  come  through  the  contest 
successfully ,  but  they  had  obtained  an  extensive  colonial  em- 
pire in  the  Far  East,  and  become  the  greatest  commercial 
nation  as  well.  During  the  earlier  years  of  the  seventeenth 
century  they  had  a  great  part  of  the  carrying  trade  of 
Europe  in  their  hands,  and  they  so  developed  the  herring 
fisheries  of  the  North  Sea  that  the  waters  yielded  them 
greater  wealth  than  Spain  got  from  her  mines  in  Peru. 

But  England  now  began  to  rise  up  as  a  great  commercial 
power.  Her  geographical  position  was  more  favorable 
than  that  of  the  Dutch,  since  she  lay  across  the  routes 
by  which  the  Dutch  reached  the  outside  world,  and  could, 
if  she  desired,  always  close  them.  Sea  wars  followed, 
resulting  largely  from  commercial  and  colonial  competi- 
tion, in  which  the  Dutch  failed  to  hold  their  own.  Worse 
still,  they  were  exposed  to  attacks  from  France,  then, 
under  Louis  XIV,  the  greatest  and  most  aggressive  mili- 
tary power  in  Europe,  and  they  were  not,  like  England, 
protected  by  the  sea.     The  Dutch  did  save  themselves, 


ITALY,   STAIN,   LESSER  STATES     355 


and  afterward,  together  with  Enghind,  they  cheeked  tlic 
aggressions  of  France.  But  by  1713,  when  this  was 
achieved,  they  were  exliausted  by  a  task  which  liad  })ecn 
beyond  their  strength,  and  whereas  in  tlie  seventeenth 
century  they  were  one  of  the  principal  Euroj^ean  powers, 
in  the  eighteenth  they  sank  to  the  second  class  and  no 
longer  played  a  great  part.  Like  Spain,  the  United  Nether- 
lands, even  in  this  period  of  decline,  continued  to  pos- 
sess large  colonial  dominion,  mostly  in  the  Far  East;  but 
unlike  the  Spaniards,  the  Dutch  continued  to  be,  what 
they  had  been  from  the  first,  industrious  and  successful 
workers.  They  played  a  lesser  part  because  neighboring 
powers  had  gro\\Ti  far  greater  and  more  rapidly  than  them- 
selves, so  that  relatively  they  were  less  than  before. 

During  the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution  the  Dutch 
Netlierlands  were  overrun  like  others  countries  near  by; 
and  in  1810  they  were  annexed  directly  to  France.  But 
when  Napoleon's  power  was  crumbling,  the  Dutch  pro- 
claimed their  freedom  and  made  themselves  a  kingdom 
under  William  I,  son  of  the  last  stadtholder  who  had  ruled 
before  the  Frenchmen  came.  When  the  Congress  of 
Vienna  was  doing  its  work,  the  leaders  determined  to 
strengthen  Holland  against  possible  aggression  from 
France  in  the  future,  and  in  1815  what  had  before  the 
French  Revolution  been  the  Austrian  Netherlands,  and 
before  that  the  Spanish,  was  joined  to  the  new  Dutch 
kingdom,  the  united  territories  being  known  as  the  King- 
dom of  the  Netherlands. 

This  union  was  not  destined  to  last.  The  people  of  tlie 
Dutch  Netherlands  were  mostly  Protestant  and  Germanic, 
while  the  population  of  the  Belgic  provinces  was  Catholic 
and  part  of  it  had  derived  its  culture  from  France.  The 
Belgian  population  was  more  numerous  than  the  Dutch, 
but  while  Belgium  was  compelled  to  contribute  the  larger 
part  of  the  taxation,  the  offices  and  power  in  the  govern- 
ment were  reserved  for  Dutch  officials.     William  I  was 


The  King- 
dom of  the 
Netherlands 


Separation 
of  Belgium 
from  Hol- 
land 


356 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Holland  in 
the  nine- 
teenth cen- 
tiiry 


very  conservative;  he  offended  the  Hberals,  and  he  further 
outraged  the  feeHngs  of  his  Belgian  subjects  by  trying  to 
impose  on  them  Dutch  language  and  laws.  Wlien  in 
1830  the  Bourbon  monarchy  was  overthrown  in  France 
by  a  revolution  in  Paris,  the  Belgians  rose  against  their 
masters,  and  demanded  a  separate  legislature.  William 
refused  any  concessions,  so  they  proclaimed  their  complete 
independence.  The  Dutch  people,  inflamed  by  strong 
national  feeling,  supported  their  monarch,  and  he  might 
have  reconquered  the  rebels  had  it  not  been  that  England 
and  France  intervened.  Thus  Belgium  won  her  independ- 
ence; and,  so  different  were  the  two  peoples  in  character, 
aspirations,  and  ideals,  that  it  was  probably  best  that  the 
separation  took  place. 

The  political  history  of  Holland  in  the  nineteenth 
century  was  uneventful.  The  Dutch,  with  many  proud 
memories  from  the  past,  were  intensely  conscious  of  their 
nationality,  and  passionately  resolved  to  keep  their  inde- 
pendence. They  had  no  great  love  for  England,  who  had 
once  beaten  them  in  great  trade  wars  and  taken  from  them 
some  of  their  colonial  possessions;  but  in  the  past  France 
had  been  the  great  enemy,  and  then  they  had  only  been 
saved  by  assistance  from  Britain.  During  the  nineteenth 
century  these  conditions  no  longer  existed,  but  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  twentieth,  a  danger  that  had  long  been 
looming  up  appeared  more  threatening.  The  most  am- 
bitious German  leaders  were  thought  to  look  forward  to  a 
day  when  the  German  Empire  would  be  greater,  and  when 
it  would  include  possessions  which  they  thought  should 
properly  belong  to  it  but  which  were  not  yet  within  the 
Empire.  Some  German  writers  asserted  that  the  Dutch 
were  closely  related  to  the  Germans,  that  of  right  they 
should  enter  a  Germanic  federal  union,  and  that  Holland, 
lying  across  the  mouths  of  Germany's  great  river,  the 
Rhine,  ought  to  be  brought  into  such  union.  More  and 
more  did  the  Dutch  dread  incorporation  with  their  power- 


V//A  Russian- 
Ottoman 
<f^  ^  British 
\y:-:.\   French 
IMIH  Dutch 
^   Spanish 
I  «^  I   Portuguese 
Danish 


Scale  of  Miles 


CtNIBtt    a9ArTiH&  CO  'NC  * 


SM).    AS 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     357 


ful  neighbor,  and  the  loss  of  independent  existence.  In 
1890  Queen  Wilhelmina,  a  girl  of  ten,  came  to  the  throne, 
and  for  a  while  her  subjects  feared  that  there  ^^()lll(l  be  no 
heir  to  the  crown  and  that,  the  dj'^nasty  dying  out,  their 
country  might  lose  its  independence.  After  the  birth  of 
an  heir,  however,  this  fear  abated;  though  the  Dutch 
continued  to  guard  with  great  jealousy  against  any  in- 
fringement of  their  freedom.  After  the  beginning  of  the 
Great  War  they  guarded  their  neutrality  likewise. 

In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  the  Nether- 
lands lost  some  of  their  colonies  to  England,  and  as  a 
result  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  Ceylon  and  South  Africa 
also.  Nevertheless,  they  continued  to  retain  one  of  the 
wealthiest  of  colonial  empires,  especially  in  the  Spice 
Islands  off  southeast  Asia.  This  empire,  lucrative  and 
important,  was  until  recently  administered  without 
great  consideration  for  the  welfare  and  advancement  of 
the  natives,  primarily  in  the  interests  of  Holland. 

The  Dutch  governing  classes  were  conservative  and 
very  tenacious  in  upholding  the  system  established,  so 
that  constitutional  change  was  made  more  slowly  than  in 
neighboring  coimtries,  and  throughout  the  nineteenth 
century  constitutional  progress  lagged  behind  what  was 
accomplished  in  Great  Britain  or  France.  In  1848,  when 
the  revolutionary  movements  were  overturning  so  much 
in  Europe,  the  Dutch  King,  William  II,  quietly  and  wisely, 
though  against  his  own  wishes,  granted  a  more  liberal 
constitution,  which  with  slight  changes  satisfied  his  people 
thereafter.  The  ministry  now  became  responsible  to  the 
States  General,  the  Dutch  Parliament,  though  the  repre- 
sentatives in  the  lower  chamber  were  still  elected  by  a 
small  number  of  voters.  In  the  later  part  of  the  nine- 
teenth century,  in  1887  and  in  1896,  the  franchise  was 
extended  to  a  larger  number  of  voters,  but  as  late  as  1914 
more  than  a  third  of  the  men  were  not  yet  permitted  to 
vote. 


The  Dutch 

colonial 

dominions 


The  govern- 
ment of 
HoUand 


358  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Belgium  in  The  history  of  the  Belgian  people  is  a  long  record  of 

the  past  prosperity  and  misfortune.     In  the  Middle  Ages  they  had 

the  most  thriving  industry  in  Europe,  and  splendid  guild 
halls  and  bell  towers  still  attest  the  magnificence  of  that 
era.  But  the  country  was  also  a  debatable  land,  between 
Germany  and  France,  the  road  for  attack  by  one  on  the 
other,  and  therefore  the  battleground  in  many  wars  now 
long  forgotten.  For  a  long  time  the  sovereigns  of  France 
strove  to  add  these  provinces  to  their  dominions,  as  they 
built  up  the  kingdom  of  France;  but  they  got  only  part 
of  what  they  tried  for,  since  England  in  the  fourteenth 
century,  as  in  the  sixteenth  and  the  seventeenth  and  the 
nineteenth  and  the  twentieth,  dreaded  to  see  the  country 
right  across  the  narrow  waters  from  her,  and  almost  at  the 
mouth  of  the  estuary  of  the  Thames,  in  the  hands  of  some 
powerful  rival.  The  Belgian  pro\dnces  joined  the  other 
Netherlands  in  the  revolt  against  Philip  II,  but  the  popu- 
lation, being  almost  entirely  Roman  Catholic,  accepted 
the  overtures  of  Spain,  and  in  1579  abandoned  the  contest. 
Decline  of  Under  the  languishing  rule  of  Spain,  and  afterward  under 
prosperity  tJ^g  ineffective  administration  of  Austria,  these  provinces 
suffered  decline.  By  the  Treaty  of  Miinster  the  port  of 
Antwerp  was  closed,  so  that  its  commerce  was  ruined,  in 
order  to  promote  the  interests  of  Holland.  During  the* 
Revolutionary  period  the  Austrian  Netherlands  were 
easily  occupied  by  the  French  and  presently  annexed  to 
France.  This  annexation  of  Belgium  and  the  opening 
of  the  port  of  Antwerp  had  much  to  do  with  the  unyielding 
opposition  of  Great  Britain  to  the  Revolutionary  govern- 
ments and  to  Napoleon.  After  the  destruction  of  the 
French  Empire  Austria  resigned  her  Belgian  possessions, 
since  they  were  too  distant  to  be  easily  defended,  and  in 
exchange  for  them  she  took  territory  in  the  north  part  of 
Italy.  Belgium  was  then  added  to  the  Dutch  Nether- 
lands, partly  to  make  a  strong  state  on  the  French  frontier, 
partly  to  compensate  Holland  for  the  colonies  she  had  lost 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     8.59 

to  England.  For  fifteen  years  the  Belgian  people  endured 
a  union  which  they  disliked,  a  union  that  was  made 
burdensome  and  oppressive  by  the  Dutch  rulers.  In  1830 
they  rebelled,  and,  by  the  assistance  of  Great  Britain  and 
France,  they  got  their  indej)en{k'nce. 

In  1831  Belgium  was  established  as  a  state  independent  The  neu- 
and  perpetually  neutral;  and  when  in  1831)  Holland  at  tralization 
last  accepted  Belgian  independence,  this  provision  was 
again  confirmed  by  the  five  great  powers:  Austria,  France, 
Great  Britain,  Prussia,  and  Russia.  Thus  Belgium  was 
made  a  neutralized  state  as  Switzerland  had  been  in  1815. 
The  country  now  went  forward  wilh  its  devel()j)ment  in 
safety.  Shortly  before  the  Franco-German  War,  it  is  true, 
Napoleon  III  entered  into  secret  negotiations  with  Prus- 
sia, apparently  in  hope  that  lie  might  be  able  to  add  Bel- 
gium to  France;  but  this  came  to  nothing.  When  later, 
in  1870,  Bismarck  revealed  the  proposal,  the  British 
Government  at  once  made  treaties  with  France  and  wilh 
Prussia  respectively,  engaging  to  join  forces  with  either 
one  if  the  other  violated  Belgian  neutrality. 

After  1831  the  little  country  experienced  a  great  in-  Economic 
dustrial  development,  its  population  and  its  prosperity  ^"^^^^^'j'*^* 
increasing.  Unlike  Holland,  which  remained  an  agricul- 
tural and  commercial  country,  Belgium  possessed  great 
resources  of  coal  and  iron,  and  became  one  of  the  great 
industrial  regions  of  Europe.  The  constitution,  which 
had  been  adopted  in  1831,  was  the  most  liberal  at  the  time 
in  continental  Europe.  As  in  Great  Britain  the  ministry 
was  responsible  to  a  parliament.  As  elsewhere  tlien  the 
franchise  was  narrow,  being  allowed  only  to  those  who 
paid  a  considerable  tax.  In  18-1'8  it  was  extended  a  little, 
but  thereafter  for  nearly-  half  a  century  no  change  was 
made.  Meanwhile,  great  industrial  i)opulations  had  been 
assembled  in  the  cities,  and  after  the  franchise  had  been 
widely  extended  in  all  the  neighboring  countries  still  in 
Belgium  onlv  one  man  in  ten  could  vote.     Therefore,  at 


progress 


360 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Swiss 
cantons  in 
the  past 


Disunion 
and  stronger 
union 


last  in  1893,  the  labor  leaders  called  a  general  strike,  and 
the  legislature,  soon  yielding,  provided  for  manhood  suf- 
frage, though  with  double  votes  or  even  triple  votes  to  men 
of  property  and  at  the  head  of  a  family  or  with  unusual 
educational  attainments  or  experience  in  public  ofl&ce. 
The  result  of  this  extension  of  the  franchise,  as  in  Spain, 
was  to  give  much  greater  power  to  the  clergy,  who  con- 
trolled the  Catholic  voters. 

The  history  of  Switzerland  during  this  period  is  a  record 
of  prosperous  peace.  Some  of  the  Swiss,  in  the  midst  of 
their  mountains,  won  their  freedom  from  Austria  in  the 
Middle  Ages,  and  joined  together  in  a  confederation. 
After  first  defending  themselves  successfully,  they  pres- 
ently became  renowned  as  the  best  mercenary  soldiers  in 
Europe,  fighting  in  most  of  the  great  wars  for  pay.  The 
government  was  a  federation  of  smaller  units,  or  cantons. 
In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  Switzerland 
and  the  United  Provinces  (Holland)  were  the  only  two 
important  republics  in  the  world.  They  were  also  two  of 
the  principal  places  of  refuge  for  the  oppressed  and  those 
who  desired  freedom  of  thought.  During  the  French 
Revolution  Switzerland  was  first  penetrated  by  the  new 
ideas  and  then  overrun  by  French  soldiers,  and  in  1798 
the  Helvetic  Republic  was  established.  During  the  Na- 
poleonic period  other  cantons  were  added,  and  still  more 
w^ere  joined  to  the  Confederation  in  1815  when  the 
Congress  of  Vienna  reestablished  it  and  guaranteed  its 
neutrality.  The  cantons  remained,  as  they  had  been  for  a 
long  time  before  the  French  Revolution,  united  in  a  loose 
confederacy,  each  with  complete  local  autonomy,  much 
as  were  the  American  commonwealths  before  the  adoption 
of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

In  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  cantons, 
which  had  so  long  remained  in  partnership,  developed  a 
division  which,  after  a  while,  threatened  to  disrupt  the 
Confederation.     Some  of  the  cantons  were  Catholic  and 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     361 


agricultural  and  were  under  clerical  influence;  others 
were  Protestant,  they  contained  large  cities,  and  in  I8.'30 
they  liberalized  their  governments  and  tended  toward 
newer  ideas.  Thus  Switzerland,  like  the  United  States 
of  America  about  the  same  time,  was  split  into  two  parts, 
in  which  the  people  had  different  ideals  and  purpose,  and 
seemed  unwilling  to  continue  in  the  old  association.  In 
1840  the  radical  party  triumphed  in  an  election  in  Aargau. 
The  clericals  revolted,  and  when  they  were  suppressed 
their  opponents  proceeded  to  dissolve  the  monasteries 
of  the  canton.  Then  in  1843  the  Roman  Catholic  cantons 
formed  a  Sonderhund,  or  separate  league,  to  protect  clerical 
interests  wherever  they  should  be  attacked.  This  was 
much  like  the  establishment  of  the  Southern  Confederacy 
in  America  in  1861.  In  1847  the  federal  diet  of  the 
Confederation  ordered  the  Sonderhund  to  dissolve.  In 
the  contest  that  followed  the  separatist  movement  was 
crushed.  The  triumphant  party  now  remodelled  the  con- 
stitution, and  what  had  before  been  a  loose  confederation 
became  a  federal  republic,  with  a  constitution  something 
like  that  of  the  United  States.  By  this  constitution  of 
1848  a  federal  assembly  of  two  houses  was  established :  an 
upper  house,  the  Council  of  States,  consisting  of  two 
delegates  from  each  canton,  chosen  by  the  legislature  of 
the  canton;  the  lower  house,  the  National  Council,  con- 
sisting of  representatives  elected  by  voters  in  electoral 
districts,  all  adult  males  having  the  franchise.  The 
executive  was  vested  in  a  Federal  Council  of  seven  mem- 
bers and  a  president,  chosen  by  the  Federal  Assembly. 
The  cantons,  like  the  states  of  the  American  Union,  had 
their  own  constitutions  and  governments. 

Thereafter  the  Swiss  people  went  on  in  remarkable 
progress  and  prosperity.  They  continued,  as  for  a  long 
time  before,  to  show  that  it  was  possible  for  men  of  differ- 
ent races  and  religions  to  live  side  by  side  under  the  same 
government,  each  having  large  measure  of  freedom,  un- 


The  Sonder- 
hund 


Progress 
and  develop- 
ment in  self- 
government 


362 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Refer- 
endum 


The 
Initiative 


The  Scandi- 
navian 
countries 
in  the  past 


molested  by  the  others.  Most  of  the  population  was 
German,  but  considerable  portions  were  French  and 
Italian.  Some  were  Protestants  and  some  were  Catholics. 
There  was  no  attempt  to  enforce  uniformity  of  language 
or  customs,  as  in  Russia  and  Austria-Hungary,  but  so 
much  freedom  was  left  to  all  that  the  Swiss  Confederation 
was  reckoned  to  be  the  most  successful  democracy  in  the 
world.  And  while  its  people  perfected  their  educational 
system  until  their  schools  were  as  good  as  any  in  Europe, 
and  while  they  were  developing  great  industrial  prosperity, 
they  continued  to  teach  other  nations  the  art  of  self- 
government.  In  attempting  to  work  out  devices  by 
which  the  people  might  more  directly  control  their  govern- 
ment they  perfected  the  Referendum  and  originated  the 
Initiative.  The  Referendum,  or  referring  back  for  popular 
vote  measures  already  passed  by  the  legislature,  had  been 
employed  by  some  of  the  American  States  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  eighteenth  century,  and  afterward  was  put  into 
one  of  the  provisions  of  the  French  Revolutionary  Con- 
stitution of  the  Year  I;  but  its  use  was  extended  by  the 
Swiss  Constitution  of  1848  and  it  has  since  been  frequently 
employed.  The  Initiative,  by  which  legislation  or  an 
amendment  is  brought  forward  by  petition  of  a  certain 
number  of  voters,  was  introduced  in  Switzerland,  then 
established  in  their  constitution  of  1848,  and  since  widely 
extended  there.  Both  these  devices  were  afterward  copied 
in  the  constitutions  of  some  of  the  commonwealths  of  the 
United  States. 

The  Scandinavian  countries,  during  most  of  their 
career,  were  outside  the  great  currents  of  European  af- 
fairs, though  twice  they  greatly  affected  neighboring 
countries.  In  the  eighth,  ninth,  and  tenth  centuries, 
sailors  and  pirates  from  Norway  and  Denmark  spread 
terror  of  the  Northmen's  name  all  over  western  Europe, 
and  some  of  them  established  themselves  on  the  shores  of 
the  Mediterranean  Sea.     The  Danes  ravaged  Ireland,  and 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER   STATES     3G3 

conquered  England  for  a  while;  the  Nortlunen  sailed  to 
Iceland,  Greenland,  and  even  Vineland  or  America,  and 
established  themselves  in  Normandy  (northern  France) 
and  afterward  in  southern  Italy.  Meanwhile,  !)an(ls  (jf 
Swedes  entered  Russia.  After  these  great  Scandinavian 
wanderings  came  to  an  end,  for  a  long  time  the  northern 
peoples  affected  the  rest  of  Europe  hut  little,  for  neitlier 
their  population  nor  their  resources  made  it  possible  for 
them  to  take  a  great  part  among  wealthy  and  powerful 
peoples.  In  LSOT  the  three  countries  were  loosely  united 
under  theheadsliip  of  Denmark,  })ut  from  this  union  Swed- 
en broke  away  in  lo'-23,  and  presently  rose  to  a  position  of  The  great- 
considerable  greatness.  Her  zenith  was  reached  during  the  °^^^  °^ 
seventeenth  century.  ^Mien  central  Europe  was  torn  to 
pieces  by  the  religious  struggles  of  the  Thirty  Years  War, 
and  when  the  fortunes  of  Protestantism  were  at  their 
lowest  ebb,  Gustavus  Adolphus,  king  of  Sweden,  became 
the  Protestant  champion,  and,  bringing  to  Germany  an 
army  of  zealous  soldiers  with  a  powerful  train  of  artillery, 
he  won  great  battles  and  saved  Protestantism  from  the 
Counter-Reformation.  He  also  established  the  greatness 
of  his  country,  for  the  settlement  made  after  his  death  in 
1648  left  the  shores  of  the  Baltic  under  Swedish  control. 
But  during  the  eighteenth  century  greater  neighbors, 
Hke  Russia  and  Prussia,  rose  up  against  her,  and  Sweden's 
resources  were  hopelessl}-  wasted  in  vain  struggles  to  keep 
her  outlying  possessions.  At  the  time  of  the  French 
Revolution  Scandinavian  greatness  was  definitely  past. 
By  1814  Denmark,  to  which  Norway  was  still  joined,  was 
an  unimportant  country,  and  Swetlen  had  lost  lier  pos- 
sessions outside  the  Scandinavian  peninsula.  In  each  of 
these  countries  the  Lutheran  faith  was  the  religion  of  al- 
most all  of  the  people. 

From  Denmark  the  Congress  of  Vienna  took  Norway     Sweden  and 
and  joined  it  to  Sweden.     In  1814  the  Norwegian  people     Norway 
declared  their  country  a  sovereign  state.     They  yielded. 


364 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Different 
circum- 
stances in 
the  two 
countries 


Foreign 
relations 


however,  to  the  Great  Powers,  and  the  two  countries  were 
loosely  joined,  each  having  its  own  constitution,  but  the 
two  being  united  under  one  king.  This  arrangement 
lasted  throughout  the  nineteenth  century,  because  of  the 
moderation  and  prudence  of  the  rulers,  but  the  interests 
of  the  two  peoples  were  incompatible  and  divergent. 
The  Swedish  kings  always  desired  to  make  their  state 
stronger  by  bringing  about  a  closer  union  of  the  two  coun- 
tries, and  having  the  two  peoples  cherish  the  same  inter- 
ests in  common ;  the  people  of  Norway,  with  different  ideas 
and  desires,  wished  that  there  were  no  union  at  all,  and 
strove  to  have  it  made  looser.  Sweden  was  larger  and 
more  populous,  but  while  there  was  more  wealth  in  the 
country,  wealth  and  power  were  concentrated  in  the 
hands  of  nobles  and  aristocracy,  leaving  the  mass  of  the 
people  without  property  or  political  power.  The  govern- 
ment was  vested  entirely  in  the  hands  of  the  king,  checked, 
when  at  all,  only  by  an  assembly  of  estates,  something 
like  those  which  had  disappeared  in  England  and  Spain 
long  before,  and  like  those  which  had  been  resurrected  in 
France  in  1789.  In  Norway,  while  the  resources  of  the 
country  were  little  and  the  soil  was  poor,  the  land  had 
become  divided  among  a  large  number  of  small  farmers, 
there  was  much  democratic  feeling,  and  the  constitution 
adopted  in  1814  put  the  government  in  the  hands  of  a 
Storthing  or  legislature,  in  which  the  representatives  were 
elected  by  voters  whose  franchise  depended  upon  a  low 
property  qualification.  In  the  nineteenth  century  the 
Industrial  Revolution  gradually  became  important  in 
Sweden,  and  then  manufacturing  was  added  to  her  agri- 
culture. In  Norway  commerce  was  developed  until  the 
Norwegian  merchant  marine  was  the  fourth  largest  in  the 
world.  In  foreign  relations  Norway  was  drawn  more  and 
more  toward  England  and  France,  while  Sweden,  resent- 
ing the  Russian  seizure  of  Finland,  and  always  fearing 
further   Russian   expansion   toward   the    sea,   more   and 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     365 


more  imitated  Germany's  methods  and  synipatliized  with 
her  purpose  and  desires. 

So  the  two  peoples  drew  ever  further  apart.  In  18Gf5 
a  Swedish  constitution  was  granted,  with  a  parHament 
hlce  those  of  western  Europe,  hut  great  power  was 
left  to  the  king  and  also  to  the  wealthy  upper  classes. 
Meanwhile,  Norway  became  increasingly  liberal  and 
democratic.  In  1884  manhood  suffrage  was  established. 
In  1901  she  gave  the  municipal  franchise  to  women  tax- 
payers, and  six  years  later  followed  this  by  granting  the 
parliamentary  franchise  to  women  and  allowing  thorn  to 
sit  in  the  Storthing.  Moreover,  in  Norway  a  great  literary 
national  revival  was  carried  on,  so  that  the  people  became 
more  conscious  of  their  nationality  and  more  eager  for 
complete  independence.  For  a  long  time  they  insisted 
that  they  should  have  a  separate  flag,  and  particularly 
that  their  immense  shipping  entitled  them  to  appoint 
their  owti  consuls  abroad.  Sweden  refused  to  allow  this, 
and  great  tension  arose,  though,  because  of  restraint  and 
moderation  on  both  sides,  there  was  never  a  resort  to 
arms.  Finally,  in  1905,  the  Storthing  declared  the  inde- 
pendence of  Norway.  The  Swedes,  more  powerful  though 
they  were,  wisely  decided  not  to  try  to  force  their  neigh- 
bors back  into  a  distasteful  allegiance  of  no  use  to  them- 
selves, and  so  ihcy  acceded  to  the  separation.  A  Danish 
prince  was  invited  to  be  king,  but  the  monarchy  was  as 
limited  and  as  democratic  as  in  England.  In  1907  Great 
Britain,  France,  Germany,  and  Russia  signed  a  treaty 
with  Norwegian  representatives  guaranteeing  the  integrity 
and  also  the  neutrality  of  Norway.  Good  relations  be- 
tween the  two  Scandinavian  countries  were  soon  resumed, 
despite  the  fact  that  some  resentment  lingered  in  Sweden. 
The  two  countries,  accordingly,  proceeded  peaceably  on 
their  separate  ways. 

During  all  this  time  Denmark  had  gradually  become 
the   least  important   of  the   northern   nations.     Norway 


Separation 
of  Norway 
from 
Sweden 


The  inde- 
pendence of 
Norway, 
1905 


Denmark 


366 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Loss  of 

Schleswig- 

Holstein 


Government 


The 

franchise 


had  been  taken  from  her  in  1814;  Schleswig-Holstein, 
containing  some  Danish  population,  had  been  lost  in  1864. 
Across  the  base  of  the  Jutland  peninsula,  which  had  pre- 
viously been  hers,  the  great  German  Kiel  Canal  was  cut, 
and  through  it  went  ships  that  would  formerly  have  gone 
around  through  the  Danish  channels.  She  still  had  Ice- 
land and  Greenland,  far  away  and  unimportant,  and  a  few 
islands  in  the  West  Indies,  which  finally  she  sold  to  the 
United  States.  Furthermore,  her  territory  seemed  to  some 
of  the  ambitious  German  pleaders  to  be  properly  a  German 
outpost  like  Holland  or  Belgium.  In  1905  the  German 
emperor  told  the  tsar  that,  in  the  event  of  war  with 
England,  Russia  and  Germany  should  occupy  Denmark; 
and  increasingly  the  people  of  the  country  lived  under  the 
shadow  of  their  neighbor  to  the  south.  Meanwhile,  in 
Denmark,  as  in  Norway  and  in  Sweden,  democracy  and 
constitutional  government  made  progress,  though  much 
less  rapidly  than  among  the  Norwegians.  In  1849  a 
constitution  was  granted,  establishing  a  parliament  or 
Rigsdag,  but  actually  government  remained  in  the  hands 
of  the  king  and  the  upper  class,  and  the  ministry  was  not 
responsible  to  representatives  of  the  people  any  more  than 
it  was  in  Prussia.  Indeed,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nme- 
teenth  century  money  was  frequently  collected  as  a  result 
of  royal  decree,  and  not  because  appropriation  was  made 
by  the  Folkething  or  lower  chamber.  But  the  people  de- 
veloped their  intensive  agriculture  and  their  dairy  farming 
and  established  a  remarkably  successful  system  of  co- 
operative enterprise,  by  which  middlemen  were  largely 
eliminated,  and  so  far  improved  their  economic  position 
that  they  really  became  more  and  more  important.  Ac- 
cordingly, in  1901  the  king  granted  what  he  knew  they 
desired,  that  the  ministry  should  be  dependent  upon  the 
majority  elected  to  the  Folkething  by  the  people.  By  the 
constitution  of  1849,  which  was  revised  in  1866,  the  fran- 
chise was  given  to  men  who  were  householders  and  not 


ITALY,   SPAIN,   LESSER  STATES     3G7 

dependent  upon  charity,  who  were  thirty  years  of  age  or  Extension  of 
more.  In  1915  the  suffrage  was  granted  to  all  men  twenty-  ^^^  franchise 
five  years  old  and  upward,  and  also  to  most  of  the  women. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Italy:  E.  Bourgeois  and  E.  Clermont,  Rome  et  Sapoleon  III 
(1907);  R.  Cadorna,  La  Liberaziune  dl  Roma  nelVAniio  1S70 
(1889);  L.  Cappeietti,  Storia  di  Vittorio  Emmanuele  II,  3  vols. 
(1893);  Francesco  Oispi,  Politica  E.stera;  Memurie  e  Docu- 
menti,  ed.  by  T.  Palamenghi-Crispi  (1914);  Memoirs  of  Francesco 
Crispi,  3  vols.  (1912-14);  G.  S.  Godkin,  Life  of  I'ictor  Emmanuel 
II,  2  vols.  (1879);  Italia  e  Jugoslavia  (1918);  consisting  of  essays 
by  various  Italian  and  South  Slav  writers,  in  moderate  spirit; 
Ernest  Lemonon,  Ultalie  Eco7wmique  et  Sociale,  lSGl-1912 
(1913);  Bolton  King  and  Thomas  Okey,  Italij  To-day  (2d  ed. 
1909);  G.  Massari,  La  Vita  ed  il  Regno  di  Vittorio  Emanuele  II, 
2  vols.  (1901);  P.  L.  Orsi,  U Italia  Moderna  (2d  ed.  1902);  A. 
Pingaud,  Ultalie  depuis  1870  (1915);  A.  Pougeois,  Ilistoire  de 
Pie  IX  et  de  Son  Pontifical,  6  vols.  (1877-88);  W.  K.  Wallace, 
Greater  Italy  (1917). 

Spain:  Don  Rafael  Altamira,  Historia  de  Espana,  4  vols. 
(1900-11);  J.  L.  M.  Curry,  Constitutional  Government  in  Spain 
(1899);  Discursos  Parlamentarios  y  Politicos  de  Emilia  Castelar, 
4  vols,  (no  date),  for  many  a.spects  of  Spanish  life  and  govern- 
ment from  the  point  of  view  of  the  great  liberal  and  republican 
leader;  Yves  Guyot,  L" Evolution  Politique  et  Sociale  de  VEspagne 
(1899);  David  Hannay,  Don  Emilio  Castelar  (1896);  Angel 
Marvaud,  La  Question  Sociale  en  Espagne  (1910),  UEspagne 
an  XX'  Siccle  (1913) ;  J.  W.  Root,  Spain  and  Its  Colonies  (1898) ; 
E.  H.  Strobel,  The  Spanish  Revolution,  1S6S-1S75  (1898);  H. 
R.  Whitehouse,  The  Sacrifice  of  a  Throne  (1897),  best  for  the 
reign  of  Amadeo  of  Savoy;  H.  W.  Wilson,  The  Downfall  of  Spain 
(1900),  concerning  the  Spanish-American  War. 

Portugal:  Gustav  Diercks,  Das  Moderne  Portugal  (1913); 
A.  Marvaud,  Le  Portugal  et  Ses  Colonies  (1912);  H.  M.  Stephens, 
Portugal  {IS91). 

Holland:  excepting  books  written  in  Dutch  there  are  fewer 
books  about  modern  Holland  than  the  other  small  countries 
of  Europe.  There  is,  however,  a  work  of  the  highest  excellence: 
P.  J.  Blok,  Geschiedenis  van  het  Xederlandsche  I'olk,  4  vols. 
(2d  ed.  1912-15),  trans,  by  Ruth  Putnam  and  others.  History  of 


368  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

the  People  of  the  Netherlands,  5  vols.  (1898-1912),  the  later  chap- 
ters concerning  the  recent  period.  Clive  Day,  The  Policy 
and  Administration  of  the  Dutch  in  Java  (1904),  excellent. 

Belgium:  J.  Barthelemy,  L' Organisation  du  Suffrage  et  VEx- 
pSrience  Beige  (1912),  best  on  Belgian  political  institutions; 
L.  Bertrand,  LSopold  II  et  Son  Regne,  1865-1890  (1890),  Histoire 
de  la  Diniocratie  et  du  Socialisme  en  Belgique  depuis  1830,  2  vols. 
(1907),  from  the  socialist  point  of  view;  Leon  Dupriez,  V Organi- 
sation du  Suffrage  Universel  en  Belgique  (1901),  R.  C.  K.  Ensor, 
Belgium  (1915);  Leon  van  der  Essen,  A  Short  History  of  Belgium 
(1916);  J,  de  C.  MacDonnell,  King  Leopold  II,  His  Rule  in 
Belgium  and  the  Congo  (1905),  Catholic;  M.  Wilmotte,  La 
Belgique  Morale  et  Politique,  1830-1890  (1902). 

Switzerland:  F.  O.  Adams  and  C.  D.  Cunningham,  The  Swiss 
Confederation  (1889);  Karl  Dandlicher,  trans,  by  E.  Salisbury, 
A  Short  History  of  Sivitzerland  (1899);  W.  H.  Dawson,  Social 
Switzerland  (1897);  H.  D.  Lloyd  and  J.  A.  Hobson,  A  Sovereign 
People;  a  Study  of  Svnss  Democracy  (1907);  I,  B.  Richman, 
Appenzell,  Pure  Democracy  and  Pastoral  Life  in  Inner  Rhoden 
(1895);  Paul  Seippel,  editor,  La  Suisse  au  Dixneuvieme  Siecle, 
3  vols.  (1899-1901),  the  most  important  work  on  the  subject, 
by  a  group  of  Swiss  writers. 

The  Scandinavian  countries:  R.  N.  Bain,  Scandinavia,  a 
Political  History  of  Denmark,  Norway  and  Sioeden,  from  1513  to 
1900  (1905);  Povl  Drachmann,  The  Industrial  Development  and 
Commercial  Policies  of  the  Three  Scandinavian  Countries  (1915). 

Norway:  A.  A.  F.  Aall,  Die  Norwegisch-Swedische  Union,  Ihr 
Bestehen  und  Ihr  L'osung  (1912);  H.  H.  Boyesen,  The  History  of 
Norway  (1896);  Knut  Gjerset,  History  of  the  Norwegian  People, 
2  vols.  (1915);  L.  Jordan,  La  Separation  de  la  Suede  et  de  la 
Norvege  (1906);  Fridtjof  Nansen,  Norway  and  the  Union  with 
Sweden  (1905),  from  the  Norwegian  point  of  view. 

Sweden:  P.  Fahlbeck,  La  Constitution  Suedoise  et  le  Parle- 
mentarisme  Moderne  (1905);  A.  Mohn,  La  Suede  et  la  RSvolu- 
tion  Norvegienne  (1905);  Sweden,  Its  People  and  Industries, 
published  by  order  of  the  Swedish  government,  edited  by  Gustav 
Sundbarg  (1904). 

Denmark:  J.  Carlsen,  H.  Olrik,  and  C.  N.  Starke,  Le  Dane- 
marck  (1900);  H.  Weitemeyer,  Denmark  (1891). 


CHAPTER   XIV 

COLONIES   AND   IMPERIAL 
EXPANSION 

God  of  our  futhcrs,  known  of  old. 

Lord  of  our  far-flung  battle-line. 
Beneath  whose  awful  Hand  we  hold 

Dominion  over  palm  and  pine — 
Lord  Gofl  of  Hosts,  be  with  us  yet. 
Lest  we  forget — lest  we  forget! 

RuDYARD  KiPUNG,  " R^iessional"  (1897) 

If  Germany  becomes  a  Colonizing  Power,  all  I  can  say  is  "God  speed 
her."  She  becomes  our  ally  and  partner  in  the  execution  of  a 
great  purpose  of  Providence  for  the  benefit  of  mankind,  and  I  hail 
her  entrance  upon  that  operation,  and  gladly  shall  I  hope  that  she 
will  become  associated  with  us  in  carrying  the  light  of  civilization, 
and  the  blessings  that  depend  thereon,  among  the  more  backward, 
and,  as  yet,  less  significant  regions  of  the  world. 

Gladstone,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  March  12,  1885. 

The  latter  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  strik- 
ingly marked  by  a  great  movement,  which  had,  indeed, 
been  going  on  for  some  hundreds  of  years:  the  extending 
of  the  power  of  European  governments  and  the  expansion 
of  their  peoples  into  other  parts  of  the  world.  If  in  the 
second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  process  was 
more  rapid  than  ever  before,  this  was  mostly  because 
some  of  the  European  powers  had  become  stronger  and 
more  capable  of  great  undertakings  and  because  the  world 
was  relatively  smaller  through  new  means  of  communica- 
tion: telegraph,  steamship,  and  railroad.  The  principal 
motives  continued,  as  in  the  earlier  times,  to  be  desire  for 
new  sources  of  raw  materials  and  wealth,  the  hope  which 
individuals  had  of  making  their  fortune,  and  the  belief 
that  acquiring  colonies  would  render  the  mother  country 

369 


The 

expansion 
of  Europe 
and  Euro- 
pean power 


370  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

richer  and  stronger  and  greater.  As  the  Virginia  Com- 
pany of  London  and  the  Dutch  East  India  Company  had 
carried  colonists  and  power  to  America  or  Asia  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  so  in  the  nineteenth  did  the  Associa- 
tion of  the  Congo  and  the  British  South  Africa  Company 
acquire  great  African  dominions.  As  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries  England  and  France  aspired  to 
get  colonial  possessions  from  which  they  might  have 
assured  supply  of  naval  stores  and  raw  materials,  so  in  the 
nineteenth  and  twentieth  was  it  the  highest  ambition  of 
the  German  Empire  to  possess  colonies  containing  copper, 
cotton,  and  rubber.  And  as  Great  Britain  in  the  time 
of  George  II  and  George  III  wished  America  to  buy  British 
manufactures  and  supply  business  for  the  British  ships, 
so  did  France  and  Germany  now  hope  that  they  might 
build  up  colonial  empires  to  assure  them  of  a  market  for 
the  sale  of  the  goods  which  they  made. 
Europe  Few  things  are  more  wonderful  than  this  expansion  of 

much  less  European  people  and  power  into  America,  Asia,  and 
•?^*i?rf-!*  Africa  in  the  past  four  hundred  years,  and  nothing  better 
reveals  the  primacy  which  Europe  has  acquired.  Only  a 
small  part  of  the  land  of  the  earth  is  in  Europe,  and  only  a 
small  part  of  its  population  formerly  lived  there.  In  early 
times  the  north  shore  of  Africa,  with  Egypt  and  Carthage, 
was  more  important  than  southern  Europe  with  Greece 
and  Rome.  From  far-away  times  Asia  rightly  seemed 
the  center  of  the  world  and  the  cradle  of  civilization. 
Then  western  culture  was  only  beginning  in  the  valley  of 
the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  and  in  Africa  in  the  valley  of  the 
Nile.  At  that  time  dim  in  the  distance  and  scarcely  known 
were  the  teeming  myriads  of  old  India,  and  farther  remote 
the  vast  numbers  and  immobile  character  of  immemorial 
China.  Later  on,  to  the  wealthy  and  cultured  upper 
classes  of  Hindustan  and  Persia,  Europe  must  have  seemed 
small  and  sparsely  peopled  and  unimportant,  on  the  dim 
frontier  of  the  world.     Presently  the  Roman  Empire  was 


in  the  past 


dominate  the 
world 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  371 

built  up  in  southern  Europe,  })ut  after  u  while  tliis  Empire 
passed.  During  all  this  time  and  long  after,  the  great 
American  continents  lay  hidden  beyond  tlicir  ocean,  al- 
most unpeopled,  and,  to  the  rest  of  the  world,  unsusiM-ett-d 
and  unknown,  unless  sometimes  faintly  imagined  as  At- 
lantis or  Ultima  Thule. 

During  the  past  four  hundred  years  a  vast  change  has  European 
come  over  the  world.  Asia,  whose  people  as  late  as  the  people  now 
thirteenth  century  threatened  to  overrun  Europe,  long 
ago  lost  her  superiority,  and  Europe  going  forward  with 
immense  acceleration,  luis  gained  unciuestioned  primacy 
in  culture  and  power.  First  she  discovered  and  api)ro- 
priated  the  Americas,  then  parts  of  Asia,  then  almost 
all  of  Africa  also.  By  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
century  European  people  and  their  rule  had  gone  forth 
into  all  the  four  cjuarters  of  the  world.  America  North 
and  South  had  been  occupied  by  England,  France,  Portu- 
gal, and  Spain,  and  notwithstanding  that  most  of  this 
western  world  was  now  divided  into  indej)endent  states, 
yet  the  language  and  culture  of  Europe  predominated  al- 
most completely.  In  Asia  all  the  northern  lialf  had  been 
taken  by  Russia,  and  Russian  power  was  being  steadily 
pushed  to  the  southward;  India  had  long  been  under 
the  rule  of  Englishmen,  the  great  islands  off  its  southeast 
coast  had  been  colonized  or  mastered  by  the  English  and 
the  Dutch;  and  France  had  obtained  valuable  possessions. 
Africa,  w'hose  immense  interior  had  until  the  nineteenth 
century  been  largely  imknown  and  mostly  unexplored, 
had  now  been  penetrated  from  all  sides,  and  with  the 
exception  of  the  kingdom  of  Abyssinia  and  the  republic 
of  Liberia,  completely  occupied  by  European  powers. 

The  greatest  though  not  the  oldest  of  these  colonial      The 
empires  was  the  British.     At  the  end  of  the  nineteenth      British 
century  it  contained  13,000,000  square  miles  of  territory,        ™P"^e 
more  than  a  fourth  of  the  landed  surface  of  the  earth,  and 
425,000,000  people,     ^yhile  England  was  still  unimportant 


372 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Beginning 
of  English 
colonization 


Increase  by 
conquest 


in  Europe,  Portugal  had  found  the  first  sea  routes  to  the 
east  and  founded  a  wealthy  empire  and  trade,  and  about 
the  same  time  Spain  had  taken  the  Americas  and  built  up 
a  huge  empire  beyond  the  Atlantic.     But  the  Dutch  soon 
took  the  best  of  the  Portuguese  possessions  and  founded 
their  own  colonial  empire  in  the  Spice  Islands  of  the  East, 
and  after  a  period  of  stagnation  and  decay  the  Spanish 
colonies  in  America  broke  their  connection  with  the  mother 
country  and  completely  established  their  independence. 
Meanwhile,  England,  starting  a  hundred  years  later  than 
these  rivals,  had  slowly  and  without  any  settled  design 
been  building  up  a  widespread  dominion.     As  early  as 
1583  she  established  a  claim  to  Newfomidland,  the  center 
of  the  wondrous  new  American  fisheries.     In  the  early 
years  of  the  seventeenth  century  she  carried  forward  her 
settlements  and  acquisitions  in  America.     She  took  pos- 
session of  some  of  the  smaller  islands  of  the  West  Indies, 
and  presently,   in    1655,   the  more  important  island  of 
Jamaica.     During  this  same  period  she  began  the  estab- 
lishment of  her  colonies  on  the  mainland,  and  in  the  years 
from  1607,  when  Virginia  was  founded,  to  1733,  when 
Georgia  was  established,  she  obtained  the  best  part  of  the 
Atlantic  coast  of  North  America.     Meanwhile,  in  1638, 
she  had  taken  Honduras  in  Central  America.     In  the  first 
half  of  the  seventeenth  century  also  she  obtained  a  footing 
in  Africa  at  Gambia  and  on  the  Gold  Coast,  and  in  1651  the 
little  island  off  the  west  African  coast,  St.  Helena,  after- 
ward so  renowned.     Meanwhile,  in  Hindustan  the  English 
East  India  Company  was  establishing  forts  and  factories 
that  were  the  forerunners  of  an  Indian  empire. 

Down  to  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century  the  English 
colonies  were  largely  the  result  of  settlement  or  explora- 
tion, and  most  of  them  lay  in  North  America.  In  the 
eighteenth  century  Britain  greatly  extended  her  holdings 
as  the  result  of  successful  wars,  mostly  at  the  expense  of 
France.     In  1704,  during  the  War  of  the  Spanish  Succes- 


"  ^A^ 

-^'s^N 

y 

e^       <w 

—g 

f 

TO?     »      ^*v 

< 

J 

£«  t>            X 

a 

I 

ll 

o    * .            ^S 

— ^1 

%ii/^ 

s 

M  V  a  3  o       ^  y  r  a  M  J 


s  8- 


o 

GO 


s 

-& 

E 


g     ^ 


U.        C3        CQ 


I 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  373 

sion,  she  seized  Gibraltar,  then  the  gateway  to  the  Mediter-      Gibraltar 

ranean,  whieh  ever  since  she  has  kept;  while  in  1713,  by  the 

Treaty  of  Utrecht,  which  brought  the  struggle  to  an  end, 

she  got  from  France  New  Brunswick  and  No\'a  Scotia,  the 

outposts  of  Canada,  and  undisputed  title  to  the  territory 

of  Hudson  Bay.     In  17G3,  by  the  Peace  of  Paris,  wliich 

ended  the  Seven  Years  War  between  England  and  France, 

she  got  from  France  the  remainder  of  Canada,  what  is 

now  Prince  Edward  Island,  Ontario,  and  Quebec,  as  well 

as  important  islands  in  the  West  Indies;  and  at  the  same 

time  the  supremacy  of  the  British  in  India  was  confirmed. 

A  little  later  she  took  the  Falkland  Islands  not  far  east  of 

the  southern   extremity  of   South   America,    memorable 

for  a  sea  battle  long  after.     Now,  however,   came   the 

great  disaster  in  the  history  of  the  British  Empire:  in  1775 

the  Thirteen  Colonies  on  the  mainland  of  Nortli  America 

rebelled,  and  by  1783  had  won  the  acknowledgment  of 

their  independence. 

It  seemed  then  that  an  irreparable  loss  had  been  sus-  Further 
tained;  and  in  truth  not  only  had  the  most  precious  pos-  growth 
sessions  of  Britain  over  the  seas  been  lost,  but  nothing 
afterward  obtained  could  be  compared  to  the  I.'^nited 
States  in  value.  It  seemed  to  some  of  the  British  leaders 
then  a  mistake  to  establish  colonies,  since  the  best  of 
of  them  cut  themselves  away  as  soon  as  they  could,  and 
the  others  were  not  w^orth  the  trouble  and  expense  of 
holding.  None  the  less,  development  of  the  British  colo- 
nial empire  soon  went  rapidly  forward  again.  In  1786 
a  beginning  was  made  of  obtaining  the  Straits  Settlements, 
situated  by  the  great  trade  routes  tliat  run  past  south- 
east Asia,  and  near  to  the  world's  greatest  supply  of  tin. 
In  1788  in  New  South  Wales  began  the  occupation  of 
Australia,  largest  of  all  the  islands,  indeed  a  continent 
in  itself.  During  the  wars  of  the  French  Revolution 
and  with  Napoleon,  British  control  of  the  sea  was  at  no 
time  shaken,  and  new  colonial  acquisitions  were  made,  at 


374 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Acquisitions 
from  France 
and  from 
HoUand 


Egypt 


the  expense  of  France,  or  of  Holland  under  French  control. 
Thus  it  was  that  Ceylon,  south  of  India,  was  taken  in  1795, 
Trinidad,  off  the  north  coast  of  South  America,  two  years 
later,  and  Cape  Colony  in  1806,  all  from  the  Dutch;  and 
Britain  kept  them  when  the  affairs  of  Europe  were  settled 
at  the  Congress  of  Vienna,  Holland  getting  Belgium  as 
compensation.  In  addition  she  got  other  West  India 
Islands  from  France,  also  Malta,  one  of  the  principal  keys 
of  the  Mediterranean,  and  Helgoland,  once  owned  by 
Denmark,  destined  later  to  be  the  impregnable  German 
fortress  guarding  Germany's  North  Sea  coast.  Mean- 
while, the  servants  of  the  East  India  Company  had  ex- 
tended the  Company's  sway  over  a  vast  territory  and 
population  in  India,  and  in  1858,  after  the  suppression  of 
the  Indian  IMutiny,  the  Company's  powers  were  trans- 
ferred to  the  British  Crown,  the  country  becoming  the 
greatest  domain  of  the  Empire.  During  the  first  half  of  the 
nineteenth  century  also,  while  the  United  States  was 
growing  across  the  middle  of  North  America  to  the  Pacific, 
Great  Britain  extended  her  possessions  in  Canada  to  the 
Pacific,  and,  except  for  Alaska,  got  possession  of  all  North 
America  from  the  United  States  to  the  Arctic.  In  1878, 
at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  in  return  for  support  against 
Russia,  Turkey  ceded  to  Great  Britain  the  island  of  Cy- 
prus, at  the  eastern  end  of  the  Mediterranean  Sea. 

In  the  second  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  England 
obtained  complete  control  of  the  eastern  Mediterranean 
Sea,  as  she  had  long  held  the  other  end  at  Gibraltar. 
Egypt  had  always  been  on  one  of  the  great  trade  routes, 
and  the  British  had  long  been  interested  in  it,  but  now 
occurred  an  event  which  gave  it  command  of  the  princi- 
pal ocean  highway  of  the  world.  A  Frenchman,  Ferdi- 
nand de  Lesseps,  organized  a  company,  partly  French, 
partly  shared  in  by  the  Egyptian  Government,  for  the 
purpose  of  cutting  a  ship  canal  through  the  isthmus  that 
joined  Africa  and  Asia.     He  afterward  failed   in   a   still 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  375 

greater  undertaking  at  Panama,  hut  in  ISOO  the  Suez  Canal  The  Suez 
was  opened  to  traffic,  and  tlie  route  to  tlie  East,  formerly 
around  tfie  Cape  of  Good  Hope  far  to  the  south,  was 
shortened  by  six  thousand  miles.  Before  the  discovery 
of  America  the  Mediterranean  Sea  had  been  the  most 
important  of  all  bodies  of  water;  after  the  time  of 
Columbus  and  Da  Gama  changed  conditions  had  made 
its  consequence  less;  but  now  the  oix'uing  of  the  canal 
in  Egypt  made  the  Mediterranean  the  short  water  route 
between  Europe  and  Asia,  and  the  greatest  sea  way  in 
the  world.  This  route  was  now  to  pass  under  British 
control.  In  1875,  the  Khedive,  the  ruler  of  Egypt,  a 
spendthrift  at  the  end  of  liis  resources,  sold  to  the  British 
Government  Egypt's  shares  for  £5,000,000.  Thus  Britain, 
owning  nearly  half  of  tlie  stock,  became  the  principal 
shareholder  in  the  Company. 

The  condition  of  Egyptian  finances  soon  became  so  Egypt  be- 
involved  that  the  European  powers  intervened,  and  a  1°"^.^!* 
Dual  Control  of  the  country  was  established  by  Great  protectorate 
Britain  and  France.  In  1881  a  nationalist  movement 
under  Arabi  Pasha  threatened  this  foreign  control  and, 
France  declining  to  participate,  England  suppressed  the 
uprising  and  took  possession  of  the  country.  France 
protested,  but  the  British  Government  declared  that  it 
was  not  establishing  a  protectorate,  and  would  witlidraw 
as  soon  as  conditions  made  it  possible  to  do  so.  Egypt 
under  British  guidance  and  control  settled  down  to  pros- 
perity and  order,  and  the  masses  of  the  people  were  better 
off  than  they  had  been  for  ages.  But  as  the  years  went 
on  British  occupation  continued.  At  length,  in  1904, 
when  Britain  and  France  entered  into  the  Entente  Cor- 
diale,  France  withdrew  her  opposition;  and  in  1914,  early 
in  the  Great  War,  Egypt  was  made  a  protectorate  of  the 
British  Empire.  Thus  did  the  Mediterranean,  held  at  its 
two  ends,  at  Port  Said  and  Gibraltar,  come  definitely 
under  British  control. 


376 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 
Sudan 


Other  pos- 
sessions in 
Africa 


South 
Africa 


Under  British  administration  Egypt's  domain  was 
greatly  extended.  To  the  south  lay  the  Sudan.  Formerly 
it  had  been  under  Egyptian  rule,  but  in  1881  the  Sudanese, 
under  a  Mahdi,  made  themselves  independent.  At  first, 
after  Egypt  had  come  under  British  control,  the  British 
Government  would  not  undertake  to  reconquer  the  Sudan ; 
but  in  1898  an  English  and  Egyptian  army  under  General 
Kitchener  overthrew  the  Sudanese  in  the  battle  of  Omdur- 
man,  and  all  the  country  of  the  upper  Nile  was  taken 
again.  It  was  at  this  time  that  British  and  French  ambi- 
tions in  northern  Africa  came  into  conflict  at  Fashoda, 
and  a  great  struggle  between  the  two  powers  was  so 
narrowly  averted. 

France  was  not  the  only  power  now  interested  in  Africa, 
and  Fashoda  was  not  the  only  place  where  conflict  might 
have  arisen.     Actually,  however,  the  division  of  Africa 
was    peacefully    accomplished.      In    1884    a    conference 
was  held  at  Berlin  upon  African  affairs;   and   in    1890 
agreements  were  made  between  Germany  and  Great  Brit- 
ain and  between  France  and  Great  Britain,  by  which  rival 
claims  were  adjusted  without  any  trouble.    British  posses- 
sions were  now  extended  south  from  the  Sudan  through 
Uganda  to  British  East  Africa  which  had  been  already  ob- 
tained.    In  exchange  for  Helgoland,  which  she  ceded  to  the 
German  Empire,  Britain  got  the  island  of  Zanzibar  just  off 
the  east  African  coast.     Thus  an  African  empire  had  been 
built  up  from  the  mouths  of  the  Nile  to  the  Indian  Ocean. 
To  the  south  an  empire  equally  magnificent  had  been 
constructed  in  the  meantime.     At  the  beginning  of  the 
century  Cape  Colony  had  been  taken  from  the  Dutch. 
Then  the  Boers,  or  Dutch  farmers,  went  away  to  the 
interior    and    founded    independent    communities:    the 
Orange  Free  State,  Natal,  and  the  Transvaal.     In  1843 
Natal  was  annexed  by  the  British,  and  the  Orange  Free 
State  and  the  Transvaal  were  taken  for  a  while,  but  soon 
given   independence   again.     In    course   of   time   British 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


377 


dominion  was  extended  far  to  the  north  of  these  small 
states.  In  1889  the  British  South  Africa  Company  was 
chartered,  and  under  the  leadership  of  Cecil  Rhodes  ac- 
quired the  vast  country  afterward  known  as  Rhodesia. 
So  British  territory  in  Africa  extended  down  from  the 
Mediterranean  to  German  East  Africa  and  up  from  the 
Cape  of  Good  Hope  to  this  same  German  possession.  In 
1899  the  trouble  which  had  long  been  growing  between 
the  British  in  South  Africa  and  the  Boer  republics  de- 
veloped into  a  war,  in  which  the  small  Dutch  comnmnities 
of  hardy  farmers,  expert  with  rifle,  well  provided  with  artil- 
lery made  in  France,  and  taking  advantage  of  the  great  dis- 
tances of  the  country,  proved  themselves  no  ill  match  for 
Great  Britain,  obliged  to  carry  on  a  difficult  contest  far 
from  her  base  of  operations.  After  skilful  and  heroic 
resistance,  however,  the  Boers  were  completely  con- 
quered, and  the  two  states  annexed  by  Great  Britain. 
As  a  result  of  these  various  developments  one  third  of  the 
continent  had  come  into  British  hands. 

During  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the 
British  continued  to  enlarge  their  dominions  in  Asia.  It 
was  they  who  in  the  "Opium  War"  in  1842  forced  the 
Chinese  Government  to  open  five  "treaty"  ports  to 
foreign  trade  and  also  to  cede  to  the  British  the  small 
island  of  Hong  Kong  off  the  south  China  coast  which 
later  became  a  great  emporium  of  trade  with  China.  The 
Opium  War  itself  was  an  exceedingly  ugly  affair.  Not- 
withstanding its  larger  results,  this  war  was  interven- 
tion by  the  British  because  of  vigorous  and  high-handed 
action  by  the  Chinese  Government  trying  to  suppress  the 
opium  traffic  and  save  its  people  from  ruin  of  body  and 
soul.  One  result  of  the  British  victory  was  that  during 
many  years  the  Chinese  Government  was  unable  to  pre- 
vent the  importation  and  use  of  opium.  The  despair 
and  indignation  of  the  enlightened  people  of  China  was  for 
a  long  time  ill  understood,  but  after  a  while  people  in  the 


The  work 
of  Cecil 
Rhodes 


Possessions 
in  China 


378 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  opium 
traffic 


The  ap- 
proaches to 
India 


western  hemisphere  came  to  reahze  the  enormity  and 
horror  of  the  thing,  and  finally  the  British  authorities 
themselves  intervened  to  help  to  bring  it  to  an  end.  From 
the  opening  of  the  Chinese  ports  an  enormous  and  wealthy 
trade  developed,  of  which  the  Great  World  Powers  obtained 
increasing  share.  Toward  the  end  of  the  century  it  ap- 
peared for  a  while  that  China  was  about  to  be  broken  up 
into  parts,  as  some  of  the  Great  Powers  began  seizing  upon 
"spheres  of  influence."  In  1898,  at  a  time  when  it  seemed 
that  Russia  was  about  to  get  the  greatest  part  of  the 
spoils  of  the  country,  the  British  demanded  and  obtained 
the  port  of  Wei-hai-wei,  not  far  from  Korea  and  Port 
Arthur,  and  far  to  the  north  of  the  old  settlement  at  Hong 
Kong.  A  little  later  they  crossed  over  the  Indian  frontier 
and  began  establishing  their  control  in  the  outlying 
Chinese  province  of  Tibet. 

India  had  from  the  first  been  the  most  important  Brit- 
ish possession  in  Asia.  After  the  defeat  of  the  French 
in  the  eighteenth  century  it  had  long  seemed  far  from 
possible  enemies  and  safe  from  attack;  but  as  the  nine- 
teenth century  passed  by,  the  constant  expansion  of 
Russia  brought  the  Muscovite  power  nearer,  until  vigi- 
lance against  Russian  expansion  in  Asia  and  the  getting  of 
a  strong  Indian  frontier  were  of  large  moment  in  the 
policy  of  Great  Britain.  With  Afghanistan,  to  the  north- 
west and  leading  to  some  of  the  great  approaches  down 
into  India,  two  wars  were  fought,  in  1838  and  in  1878,  in 
the  first  of  which  an  English  army  was  annihilated,  but  as 
a  result  of  which  the  country  became  in  its  foreign  relations 
practically  a  protectorate  of  the  British  Empire,  and  a 
buffer  state  between  India  and  Russia.  In  1854  Baluchis- 
tan, west  of  India,  across  which  Alexander  the  Great's 
soldiers  once  marched,  was  made  partly  dependent,  and 
later  on  a  portion  of  it  was  made  completely  so  and  the 
rest  of  it  was  annexed.  To  the  west  of  these  two  little- 
known  countries  lay  the  ancient  state  of  Persia.     By  the 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


379 


end  of  the  nineteenth  century  Russian  expansion  threat- 
ened to  absorb  it,  and  at  last  bring  the  Russian  Empire 
out  to  the  warm  waters  of  the  soulh,  on  llie  Persian  CJulf 
and  the  Arabian  Sea,  over  across  from  India.  To  counter- 
act this,  while  the  Russians  were  getting  control  of  north- 
em  Persia,  the  British  tried  to  dominate  tlie  south,  and  a 
long  contest  was  ended  when  Great  Britain  and  Russia 
made  their  agreement  of  1907  by  wliich  tlie  northern  por- 
tion of  Persia  became  Russia's  sphere  of  influence  and  the 
southern  a  British  spliere,  witli  a  neutral  zone  in  between. 
To  the  east  of  India  also  Britisii  power  was  extended.  In 
1885  Buj[;ma,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Bay  of  Bengal,  was 
annexed.  To  the  northeast  the  mountain  states  of  N^epal 
and  Bl\utan  were  made  dependent,  and  then  after  a  while 
the  British  crossed  through  the  vast  mountains  which 
separate  India  from  the  dominion  of  China,  and  by  1914 
had  made  of  Tibet  practically  an  outlying  dependent 
state. 

By  this  time  Britain  had  beyond  dispute  the  greatest 
colonial  empire  in  the  world.  With  the  aggregate  of  her 
domain  there  was  nothing  to  compare  except  the  posses- 
sions of  the  United  States,  the  vaster  but  less  valuable 
territory  of  Russia,  the  huge  expanses  of  stagnant  China, 
and  the  colonial  empire  of  France.  The  British  Empire 
had  been  built  up  easily  because  England's  geographical 
position  had  given  her  advantages  over  the  greatest  of  lier 
rivals,  and  her  control  of  the  sea  had  enabled  her  to  in- 
crease her  possessions  from  time  to  time  in  peace  and  as 
the  result  of  every  great  war  in  which  slie  fought.  The 
area  of  the  British  Isles  was  only  120,000  square  miles,  and 
England  less  than  half  that  much.  The  population  of  the 
United  Kingdom  was  only  about  45,000,000.  But  Eng- 
land, at  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century  one  of  the 
less  important  countries  in  Europe,  was  now  the  greatest, 
and  the  Empire  of  which  she  was  the  center  embraced  a 
fourth  of  the  land  surface  of  the  earth.     From  this  vast 


Persia 
divided  into 
"zones" 


Extent  and 
character  of 
the  British 
Empire 


880  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

area  came  a  large  part  of  the  world's  tin,  half  of  its  gold, 
a  third  of  its  coal  and  a  third  of  its  wool,  a  fifth  of  its  wheat, 
and  other  products  without  number.  Its  great  weakness 
was  that  it  was  widely  scattered,  with  the  seas  of  the  world 
separating  its  principal  parts,  and  great  land  powers 
growing  ever  more  powerful  near  them.  It  was  held  to- 
gether by  the  thing  which  had  built  it  up :  the  strongest 
navy  in  the  world.  If  ever  the  British  fleet  were  beaten 
or  dispersed,  then  the  Empire  would  lie  before  the  enemy 
like  spoil  to  be  taken  at  will, 
p      lesof  '^^^^  British  Empire  was,  in  some  respects,  a  strange 

the  Empire  and  conglomerate  affair.  Not  only  were  its  parts  widely 
separate  and  distant,  but  it  embraced  peoples  of  every 
race  and  religion  and  in  all  stages  of  culture  and  political 
progress.  Its  elements  were  far  more  diverse  than  those 
which  composed  Russia,  so  soon  to  break  up,  or  the  Dual 
Monarchy,  which  a  great  war  was  about  to  destroy.  Out- 
side of  the  British  Islets  there  were  in  this  Empire  some 
12,000,000  of  English  people,  and  about  3,000,000  more 
of  the  white  race.  They  were  mostly  in  Canada,  Aus- 
tralia, New  Zealand,  and  South  Africa.  Of  the  remaining 
365,000,000,  all  but  50,000,000  were  in  the  vast  ag- 
gregation of  races  in  the  Indian  domain,  while  in  Africa 
there  were  40,000,000  negroes,  and  in  the  other  lands  some 
millions  of  Malays,  Chinese,  and  others.  A  great  part  of 
all  the  Mohammedans  of  the  world  were  under  British 
rule,  as  were  Brahmins,  Buddhists,  and  many  others.  In 
holding  together  these  peoples  the  British  showed  them- 
selves the  ablest  colonial  administrators  whom  the  world 
ever  had  seen. 

It  is  very  true  that  under  British  rule  there  were  some 
great  evils.  It  is  also  true  that  in  the  Empire  the  people 
of  England  and  Scotland  had  obtained  great  wealth  and 
had  made  investments  that  rendered  much  of  the  world 
tributary  to  London ;  while  the  British  mercantile  marine, 
largely  supported  by  trade  between  the  parts  of  the  Em- 


British  rule 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


381 


pire,  was  the  largest  ever  seen  in  the  world.  It  is  also 
true  that  some  of  the  peoples  in  the  Empire,  in  India  and 
Egypt,  were  held  unwillingly  and  longed  to  obtain  indepen- 
dence. None  the  less,  considering  all  the  difficulties 
involved,  it  was  also  true  that  never  had  so  great  an  empire 
been  ruled  so  justly  and  well,  and  that  wherever  British 
rule  had  come,  in  India  or  tlie  islands  of  the  sea,  better 
conditions  had  resulted  for  most  of  the  peoj)le.  In  1917 
an  English  writer  said:  "This  Commonwealth  ...  is 
.  .  .  a  living  home  of  divine  freedom,  in  which  the  ends 
of  the  earth  are  knit  together  ...  in  the  name  and 
the  hope  of  self-government." 

To  all  the  white  peoples  outside  of  the  United  Kingdom 
self-government  had  been  granted,  in  Newfoundland, 
Canada,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  the  Union  of  South 
Africa.  These  self-governing  dominions  had  such  com- 
plete control  of  their  own  affairs  that  they  were  inde- 
pendent in  all  except  name,  ruling  themselves  through 
their  own  elected  representatives.  So  loose  was  the 
connection,  indeed,  that  a  statesman  declared  that  in 
August,  1914,  the  British  Empire  had  come  to  an  end.  But 
at  this  very  time  it  was  abundantly  shown  that  the  bonds 
had  never  been  stronger,  and  that  while  the  dominions 
were  no  longer  attached  by  any  compulsion  they  were 
strongly  bound  by  race  and  language  and  by  ties  of  love 
and  devotion.  For  some  years  statesmen  in  these  different 
English-speaking  communities  had  been  considering  the 
problem  of  closer  imperial  federation,  and  conferences  had 
been  held  for  this  purpose. 

To  the  remaining  365,000,000  people  of  the  Empire 
self-government  had  not  been  given.  Theoretically,  it  was 
wrong  that  a  modern  democratic  state  should  hold  under 
its  sway  people  to  whom  democracy  and  self-government 
had  not  been  extended.  But  it  could  scarcely  be 
doubted  that  the  condition  of  the  masses  of  India,  bad  as 
it  was,  had  never  been  so  good  before,  and  that  the  fella- 


Self- 

government 
in  parts  of 
the  Empire 


Subject 
peoples 


382 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  French 

colonial 

Empire 


Algeria 
acquired 


keen  were  attaining  some  prosperity  and  economic  well- 
being  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  Egypt.  There 
could  be  no  doubt  that  most  of  the  non-white  population 
of  the  Empire  would  not,  if  left  to  themselves,  have 
evolved  any  representative  system  of  self-government, 
and  were  not  yet  fitted  to  make  it  work.  The  compara- 
tive liberality  of  British  rule  made  it  the  more  possible 
for  some  of  the  educated  minority  and  the  upper  classes 
among  these  people  to  demand  independence,  and  it  was 
most  proper  that  they  should  desire  to  have  it.  None 
the  less,  it  is  probable  that  in  1914  the  greatest  good  of 
most  of  the  people  in  the  Empire  demanded  the  con- 
tinuance of  British  rule,  and  that  the  British  Empire  was 
one  of  the  most  useful  and  beneficent  organizations  in  the 
world. 

Next  in  age  and  greatness  was  the  colonial  empire  of 
France,  which  in  1914  had  an  area  of  more  than  3,000,000 
square  miles  and  a  population  of  44,000,000.  Once  the 
French  had  lost  great  possessions,  and  this  was  their  sec- 
ond colonial  empire,  the  work  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
After  the  Seven  Years  War  and  the  contests  of  the  Revolu- 
tion and  Napoleon's  time,  France's  colonial  domain  was 
reduced  to  a  few  trading  posts  in  India,  French  Guiana 
on  the  north  coast  of  South  America,  and  a  few  islands, 
of  which  the  most  important  were  Martinique  and  Guade- 
loupe, in  the  West  Indies.  Since  the  losses  her  first  con- 
spicuous advance  had  been  during  the  period  of  the  Orleans 
Monarchy.  Across  the  Mediterranean  in  north  Africa 
were  the  countries  of  the  Barbary  pirates:  Morocco, 
Algeria,  Tunisia,  and  Tripoli,  whose  people  had  preyed 
upon  European  commerce  for  ages,  and  carried  off  Chris- 
tians into  the  terrible  slavery  which  Cervantes  once  suf- 
fered and  described.  In  1830,  after  the  Dey  of  Algeria 
had  struck  the  French  consul  in  Algiers,  an  expedition  was 
despatched  which  captured  the  city.  After  a  while  the 
reduction  of  the  country  was  decided  on  and  a  long  and 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  383 

troublesome  war  was  waged  which  was  not  ended  till 
1847,  and  the  conquest  was  not  entirely  completed  until 
ten  years  later.  This  was  in  the  period  of  the  Second 
Empire,  when  Napoleon  III  was  endeavoring  to  reconcile 
Frenchmen  to  his  rule  by  conquest  and  glory  abroad.  An 
ambitious  colonial  policy  was  now  carried  forward,  some 
islands  in  the  Pacific  acquired,  and,  after  a  war  with  China, 
commercial  concessions  were  obtained  there.  In  18C2  the 
French  obtained  part  of  Cochin  China  and  the  rest  of  it 
five  years  later.  In  18(53  they  established  a  protectorate 
over  Cambodia.  In  18G7  a  beginning  was  made  of  the 
acquisition  of  French  Somaliland  in  East  Africa,  command- 
ing one  side  of  the  outlet  of  the  Red  Sea.  Notwithstanding 
that  Napoleon  failed  to  make  a  dependency  of  Mexico, 
France  was  by  the  end  of  his  reign  getting  to  be  the  second 
colonial  power  in  the  world. 

The  great  defeat  of  France  in  the  Franco-German  War,  Expansion 
had,  as  is  well  known,  an  important  effect  upon  the  dc-  ^ 
velopment  of  her  colonial  policy.  France  recovered  \Wth 
amazing  rapidity,  but  it  seemed  hopeless  to  try  to  get 
back  the  provinces  which  Germany  had  taken.  She 
turned,  therefore,  to  seek  compensation  abroad,  and  Bis- 
marck encouraged  French  statesmen  to  do  this,  glad  to 
divert  their  attention  elsewhere.  In  1885,  after  a  war 
with  China,  a  protectorate  was  established  over  Tonkin 
and  Annam,  states  in  southeastern  Asia  upon  which  the 
Chinese  had  long  had  some  shadowy  claim.  All  these 
acquisitions,  from  Cambodia  to  the  border  of  China,  be- 
came French  Cochin  China,  the  chief  Asiatic  possession  of 
France. 

But  the  greatest  expansion  of  the  French  colonial  em-     The  French 
pire  now  was  made  in  northern  Africa,  where  the  French     i°  Africa 
extended  their  power  out  from  Algeria  and  through  the 
Sahara,  until  all  the  north  part  of  the  continent  to  the 
borders  of  Egypt  and   Tripoli   was  included.     In    1881 
Tunisia,  to  the  east  of  Algeria,  was  occupied  and  became  a 


384 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Fashoda 


Extent  and 
character  of 
this  empire 


protectorate,  though  this  cost  the  friendship  of  Italy  for 
a  generation,  and  had  much  to  do  with  driving  Italy  into 
the  Triple  Alliance.     In  1892  Dahomey,  on  the  southern 
shore  of  the  great  north  African  bulge,  was  conquered,  and 
from  there,  and  from  the  mouth  of  the  Senegal  River,  which 
they  had  long  held,  expeditions  were  despatched  to  the 
north.     About  the  same  time,  farther  south,  French  trad- 
ers pushed  inland  and  acquired  the  French  Congo.     From 
all  these  points,  north  and  south,  explorers,  as  enterprising 
and  bold  as  Champlain   and   La   Salle   once  had   been, 
entered  the  country  and  took  it  for  France,  until  nearly 
all  of  the  Sahara  and  its  oases  and  trade  routes  were  ob- 
tained.    Eastward  they  pushed  until  Major  Marchand 
unfurled  the  French  flag  at  Fashoda  in  the  Sudan.     But 
by  the  Anglo-French  agreement  of  1899  the  French  with- 
drew, and  Britain  remained  in  possession  of  this  country. 
In  1895  France  established  a  protectorate  over  the  island 
of  Madagascar,  off  the  southeast  coast,  once  the  haunt  of 
pirates,  a  huge  extent  to  which  the  French  had  laid  claim 
since  before  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century.     In 
1904  England  and  France  settled  all  their  differences  in 
the  agreement  known  as  the  Entente  Cordiale:  France 
agreed  to  make  no  further  objection  to  British  manage- 
ment of  Egypt,  and  in  return  Britain  promised  support 
for  French  plans  about  Morocco.     This  country,  which 
adjoined  Algeria,  was,  in  the  eyes  of  the  French,  necessary 
to  round  out  their  north  African  possessions.     But  Ger- 
many now  intervened  and  two  great  crises,  in  1905  and  in 
1911,  brought  Europe  to  the  brink  of  war.     On  the  first 
occasion  France  yielded;  but  after  the  second  she  estab- 
lished a  protectorate  in  Morocco  also. 

As  a  result  of  this  expansion  in  Africa  and  in  Asia 
France  had  a  magnificent  colonial  empire.  Her  posses- 
sions were  far  less  in  area,  population,  and  resources  than 
those  of  the  British  Empire,  yet  some  of  them,  like  Mo- 
rocco and  Algeria,  lay  in  a  position  of  great  importance, 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


385 


they  were  a  storehouse  of  raw  materials,  and  furnished  the 
products  for  a  lucrative  trade.  Algeria  had  been  annexed 
directly  to  France,  and  sent  representatives  to  the  legis- 
lature in  Paris,  though  only  a  small  portion  of  the  popu- 
lation might  vote,  and  the  people  had  little  control  over 
the  oflBcials  who  ruled  them.  In  Algeria  to  a  considerable 
extent,  and  in  the  other  colonies  entirely,  the  French 
were  an  upper  and  ruling  class.  To  none  of  the  French 
colonies  had  complete  self-government  been  extended, 
largely,  no  doubt,  because  to  none  of  them  had  many 
Frenchmen  ever  gone  to  live.  The  French  had  shown 
great  ability  and  skill  in  acquiring  possessions,  but  they 
were  not  colonizers  as  the  British  were,  for  most  French- 
men were  unwilling  to  live  anywhere  but  in  France,  and 
no  high  birth-rate  produced  a  surplus  population  to  send 
abroad.  As  in  the  British  Empire  so  in  the  French, 
capitalists  had  large  concessions  and  had  made  great  in- 
vestments from  which  large  revenues  came.  Yet  for  the 
most  part  the  advent  of  France  into  these  distant  places 
had  brought  better  conditions  for  the  people;  and  it  was 
usually  believed  that  France  had  succeeded  in  establish- 
ing a  greater  degree  of  order,  good  government,  and  con- 
tentment in  her  African  colonies  than  any  other  European 
power  had  brought  to  that  continent,  except  the  British 
in  the  white  communities  of  the  South  African  Union. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  German 
Empire  also  acquired  colonial  possessions,  but  they  were 
far  inferior  in  size  and  in  value  to  those  of  Great  Britain 
or  France.  It  was  often  said  that  Germany  entered  the 
colonial  field  too  late.  At  a  time  when  Great  Britain  had 
obtained  vast  possessions,  and  when  France  was  building 
a  new  empire  also,  the  Germans  were  just  achieving  their 
national  unity.  Even  after  1871  it  seemed  for  some  time, 
to  Bismarck  and  his  contemporaries,  that  colonies  were 
of  little  importance,  that  the  primary  task  was  holding 
for  Germany  the  position  she  had  just  attained,  and  keep- 


Algeria  an 
extensioa 
of  France 


The  German 
colonies 


386 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Germany 
late  in  the 
colonial  field 


Disappoint- 
ment and 
relative  fail- 
ure 


ing  leadership  in  Europe.  Bismarck  thought  httle  about 
colonies,  but  much  about  his  Triple  Alliance  and  the 
friendship  of  Russia,  and  he  was  glad  to  encourage  France 
to  go  forth  and  get  what  colonies  she  could.  But  to  a 
younger  generation  colonies  seemed  indispensable,  and 
about  1879  business  men  and  merchants  made  the  begin- 
ning of  colonial  development.  In  that  year  concessions 
were  obtained  in  the  Samoan  islands.  In  the  next  few 
years  other  trading  posts  were  established  in  islands  of  the 
Pacific  and  also  in  various  regions  in  Africa.  In  1883  a 
German  merchant,  Liideritz,  laid  the  foundations  of  Ger- 
man Southwest  Africa.  A  year  later  Togoland  and 
Kamerun  on  the  Gulf  of  Guinea  were  obtained  by  a  Ger- 
man traveller.  In  the  same  year  three  other  adventurous 
Germans  acquired  what  was  made  into  the  most  important 
of  all  Germany's  colonial  possessions,  German  East  Africa, 
on  the  Indian  Ocean.  All  these  African  holdings  were  got 
in  the  first  place  by  travellers  or  merchants  making 
treaties  with  native  rulers.  By  this  time  the  interest  of 
Bismarck  had  been  enlisted,  and  the  German  Government 
established  protectorates  in  the  new  acquisitions. 

Nevertheless,  when  Germany  strove  to  obtain  colonies 
she  found  that  the  best  were  already  taken  by  England  or 
France,  or  lesser  powers.  She  had  gained  a  few  islands  in 
the  Pacific,  and  some  African  lands,  considerable  in  extent, 
but  mostly  unfit  for  white  men,  and  far  less  rich  than  what 
others  possessed.  Gradually  there  developed  in  the  minds 
of  many  Germans  a  strong  sense  of  grievance,  and  re- 
sentment because  their  rivals  had  done  so  much  better. 
To  some  of  them  it  seemed  unjust  that  France  with 
a  stationary  population  of  but  40,000,000  should  have 
enormous  colonial  dominions  capable  of  immense  develop- 
ment, while  the  German  Empire  with  65,000,000,  and  that 
population  rapidly  increasing,  had  no  colonies  to  which 
Germans  could  emigrate,  and  only  such  possessions  as 
others  for  the  most  part  had  not  cared  to  take.     To  them 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  387 

it  seemed  necessary  for  Germany's  greatness  that  more 

should  he  ohtained.     In  the  early  years  of  the  twentieth 

century  certain  Germans  exphiined  how,  after  a  successful 

war,  tlie  colonies  of  France  or  of  Great  Britain  would  be 

taken;  and  undoubtedly  the  desire  of  some  Germans  to 

possess  a  larger  colonial  empire  was  one  of  the  causes  that 

led  to  the  Great  War  of  1<)14. 

Many  efforts  were  made  to  extend  (Jerman  possessions.     The  English 

mostly  without  any  success.     British  and  (ierman  schemes     ^"^  ^^^  ^^^' 

n-  T  1  1  •  •  e  mans  in 

soon  came  mto  conflict.     It  was  the  ambition  of  some     Africa 

Englishmen  to  get  a  broad  strip  of  territory  from  the 
Gape  of  Good  Hope  to  Alexandria,  while  some  Germans 
hoped  that  their  country  might  acquire  a  stretch  of 
territory  straight  across  the  breadth  of  the  continent, 
from  German  Southwest  Africa  on  the  Atlantic  to  German 
East  Africa  on  the  Indian  Ocean.  In  1919,  as  a  result  of 
the  Great  War,  the  British  ambition  was  realized,  but 
previously  a  compromise  had  been  made.  In  1890  an 
Anglo-German  agreement  was  made  which  so  established 
German  East  Africa  that  the  British  were  unable  to 
connect  the  northern  and  southern  parts  of  their  African 
empire,  and  German  Southwest  Africa  and  Kamerun  were 
enlarged.  This  was  a  period  when  Britain  and  the  Ger- 
man Empire  were  still  on  quite  friendly  terms.  Some 
leaders  in  both  countries  wished  to  bring  about  an  alliance 
between  the  two,  and  England  looked  on  France  as  her 
most  dangerous  foe.  In  1898,  about  the  time  when  Brit-  Anglo- 
ish  and  French  ambitions  conflicting  nearly  brought  the  German 
two  countries  to  war,  a  secret  treaty  was  negotiated  l)e- 
tween  Germany  and  England  with  respect  to  the  Portu- 
guese colonies  in  Africa.  Above  German  Southwest 
Africa  lay  the  large  Portuguese  dominion  of  Angola  and 
on  the  other  side  of  the  continent,  between  German  East 
Africa  and  the  Transvaal,  Portuguese  East  Africa  inter- 
vened. The  terms  of  the  treaty  have  never  been  revealed, 
but  it  is  believed  that  they  arranged  a  division  of  these 


agreement 
of  1898 


388 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Ger- 
mans in 
Asia  and  in 
South 
America 


Scanty 
colonial 
success  of 
the  Germans 


territories  to  take  place  later  on  when  impoverished 
Portugal  would  be  willing  to  sell  them.  This  treaty  came 
to  nothing,  partly  because  Germany  and  England  now 
began  drifting  apart. 

In  Asia,  where  Germany  had  got  no  foothold,  she  had, 
after  a  while,  one  temporary  success.  In  1897,  to  avenge, 
as  they  said,  the  murder  of  two  missionaries,  the  German 
authorities  seized  Kiao-chau  Bay  in  the  Chinese  province 
of  Shantung,  and  compelled  the  Chinese  Government  to 
yield  them  a  ninety-nine  year  lease  of  the  place.  Then 
they  proceeded  to  fortify  it  and  thus  make  of  it  a  great 
naval  base,  which  might  later  be  the  foundation  of  a 
German  protectorate  in  China.  In  South  America, 
especially  in  southern  Brazil,  where  many  German  immi- 
grants had  settled,  it  was  believed  that  the  German  Em- 
pire hoped  to  get  possessions,  but  here  the  Monroe  Doc- 
trine of  the  United  States  always  stood  in  the  way.  The 
best  opportunity  that  remained  seemed  to  be  in  Asia 
Minor  and  Mesopotamia,  but  here  Germany  encountered 
the  opposition  of  Great  Britain,  until  an  agreement  was 
made  in  1914,  just  before  the  Great  War  broke  out. 

Altogether  the  efforts  of  the  Germans  to  found  a  colo- 
nial empire  had  met  with  scanty  success.  What  they 
acquired  yielded  little  revenue  and  cost  a  great  deal  to 
retain.  It  might  have  been  that  in  the  future  the  best  of 
their  colonies  could  have  been  successfully  developed,  but 
meanwhile  the  Germans  seemed  to  show  less  skill  than 
the  British  or  the  French.  In  attempting  to  impose  their 
system  and  their  organization  upon  the  natives  of  their 
colonies  they  sometimes  acted  with  great  harshness  and 
brutality,  provoking  the  natives  to  rise,  and  then  carrying 
on  wars  of  extermination  against  them.  This  conduct 
brought  them  an  evil  renown,  but  it  is  necessary  to  re- 
member that  the  terrible  climate  of  central  Africa  and 
the  distance  from  the  customs  and  civilization  of  white 
men  led  other  colonizers  besides  the  Germans  to  do  deeds 


V//'A  Russian 

Y  —  -\  Ottoman 

I  ^  I  Portuguese 

Brltisti 

r^  French 

[MI]  Dutch 

^  German 

^^-\^j  Under  British  Influence 

\;//.\  Uflder  Russian  Influence 

Scale  of  Miles 
fl  200        400       600 

I         I         I         I 

OtNjg*^  0O*FTiNC  CO  mC  N  Y, 


£2.     AS 


IN  1914 


tion 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  389 

which  might  well  bring  the  l^liish  of  shame.  Altogether, 
the  German  colonies  afforded  hope  for  the  future  rather 
than  a  present  benefit,  and  entailed  expense  to  German 
taxpayers  greater  than  the  revenue  that  was  yielded  by 
them. 

Italy,  like  Germany,  entered  upon  the  quest  for  colonies     Italian 
almost  too  late.     Like  the  Germans  the  Italian  people  were     J^o^o^'^a- 
long  occupied  in  the  effort  to  achieve  national  unity  and 
make  strong  their  position  at  home.     When  they  turned 
to  colonial  expansion  their  first  desire  was  to  take  Tunisia, 
which  lay  directly  across  the  Mediterranean  and  seemed  to 
them  the  most  natural  field  for  enlargement.     But  France 
also  wished  to  have  this  country  which  lay  on  the  border 
of   Algeria,    her    new    possession.     Acting    with    greater 
promptness  and  decision  France  took  possession  of  Tunisia 
in  LS8L     It  was  long  before  the  Italians  could  bring  them- 
selves  to    forgive   this.      They    continued    to    be    more 
numerous  there  than  the  French.     Next  they  turned  to 
an   adventure   in   another   part   of  Africa.     Some  years 
before,  an  Italian  steamship  company  had  obtained  a  port 
at  the  southern  end  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  after  1882  Italy 
built  up  from  this  the  colony  of  Eritrea.     Seven  years 
later  she  obtained  Italian  Somaliland,  some  distance  to  the 
south,  lying  on  the  Indian  Ocean.     Between  these  two  . 
possessions  lay  the  old  mountainous  kingdom  of  Abys- 
sinia, inhabited  by   hard}^  tribesmen   who  from  ancient 
times  had  professed  the  Christian  faith.     Over  Abyssinia 
the  Italian  Government  tried  to  establish  a  protectorate, 
but  the  inhabitants  of  the  country  would  by  no  means 
submit,  and  in  1896  inflicted  a  terrible  defeat  on  an  in- 
vading Italian  army  at  Adowa.     Ten  years  after,  Italy 
joined  with  Great  Britain  and  France  in  acknowledging 
the    independence  of  the  country. 

About  this  time  the  Italians  turned  their  attention  to 
northern  Africa  once  more.  In  1901  the  Italians  and  the 
French  had  settled  their  difierences,  and  it  was  under- 


Tripoli 


390 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Spain  and 
Portugal 


The  Dutch 
colonies 


stood  that  France  recognized  the  paramount  interest  of 
Italy  in  the  country  of  TripoH.  This  was  practically  the 
last  remaining  possession  of  the  Ottoman  Empire  in 
Africa.  Once  all  the  north  coast  from  Algeria  to  Egypt 
had  been  subject  to  Constantinople,  though  often  the 
authority  was  nominal  only.  But  in  the  course  of  the 
nineteenth  century  Algeria  and  Tunisia  had  been  taken  by 
France,  and  Egypt  occupied  by  the  British,  until  only 
Tripoli  and  Cyrenaica  remained.  In  1911  Italy  suddenly 
demanded  that  the  sultan  yield  these  districts,  and  when 
this  was  refused,  an  army  of  invasion  was  sent.  After  a 
year  of  fighting  Turkey  was  forced  to  cede  them.  The 
natives  of  the  interior,  however,  long  continued  an  harass- 
ing conflict  which  cost  the  Italians  dear  in  money  and  men. 

Some  of  the  lesser  Powers  like  Spain,  Portugal,  and 
Holland,  still  retained  important  colonial  dominions,  the 
relics  of  what  had  been  won  in  their  great  days  of  long  ago, 
while  in  the  nineteenth  century  Belgium  obtained  a  do- 
main in  Africa,  rich  in  tropical  resources.  In  1898  Spain 
lost  to  the  United  States  nearly  all  of  what  still  remained 
of  her  colonies:  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and  the  Philippine 
Islands  in  the  Far  East.  Portugal  had  long  since  lost 
the  best  of  her  colonies  to  the  Dutch,  from  whom  some 
had  been  taken  by  the  British;  but  she  still  retained,  in 
addition  to  some  islands  and  trading  stations,  two  large 
possessions  on  the  opposite  coasts  of  southern  Africa, 
Angola  in  the  west,  and  Portuguese  East  Africa  which 
included  Mozambique.  The  Portuguese  Government  no 
longer  showed  vigor  in  colonial  development  and  expan- 
sion, and  its  finances  were  so  hopelessly  involved  that  it 
often  seemed  that  it  might  be  well  if  it  could  surrender 
its  outlying  possessions  in  settlement  of  national  debts. 

The  Dutch  had  lost  long  ago  their  important  settlement 
at  the  mouth  of  the  Hudson  in  North  America,  and,  in 
South  America,  Brazil,  which  they  had  held  for  a  while, 
though  in  the  northern  part  of  that  continent  they  still 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


391 


retained  Dutch  Guiana.  Of  the  other  possessions  which 
they  had  once  had  South  Africa,  Trinidad,  and  Ceylon 
had  been  lost  to  the  British,  but  they  still  held  the  great 
islands  of  the  Malay  Archipelago,  off  southeastern  Asia, 
Java,  Borneo,  Sumatra,  Celebes,  the  Moluccas,  and  the 
western  part  of  New  Guinea,  after  Australia  the  largest 
island  in  the  world,  which  they  shared  with  the  British 
and  the  Germans. 

The  Dutch  colonial  empire  for  a  great  while  had  yielded 
huge  store  of  raw  materials  and  large  revenue  to  Holland. 
It  was  far  more  valuable  than  the  colonies  of  the  German 
Empire  and  for  a  long  time  more  valuable  than  those 
of  France.  It  made  Holland  much  more  important  than 
she  would  otherwise  have  been,  and  also  constituted  a 
mortgage  upon  her  political  actions.  To  Germans,  who 
hoped  for  the  later  inclusion  of  Holland  within  their  larger 
empire,  the  Dutch  islands  near  Asia  seemed  a  splendid 
addition  to  be  made  to  the  German  colonies;  while 
Holland,  not  a  great  naval  power  herself,  could  never  afford 
to  offend  the  powers  who  commanded  the  sea  lest  she  lose 
her  distant  possessions. 

Belgium  did  not  achieve  independence  until  1831,  but 
within  half  a  century  she  had  obtained  an  extensive  Afri- 
can possession.  Following  the  explorations  of  Living- 
stone and  Stanley  in  central  Africa  and  the  revelations 
they  made  of  the  possibilities  and  resources  of  this  region, 
Leopold  II  of  Belgium,  after  a  conference  of  the  powers 
held  at  Brussels,  founded  what  he  called  the  International 
Association  of  the  Congo.  He  presently  obtained  the 
sanction  of  the  Conference  of  Powers,  which  met  at  Berlin 
in  1884,  to  make  of  the  Congo  region  an  independent 
neutral  jurisdiction,  the  Congo  Free  State,  of  which  in  the 
following  year  he  became  sovereign.  He  had  invested 
large  sums  of  money  in  this  enterprise,  but  now,  taking 
for  himself  great  tracts  of  the  rubber  country  as  a  personal 
domain,  he  began  to  reaj)  a  huge  fortune  from  it.     This 


Dutch  colo- 
nial admin- 
istration 


The 

Belgian 

Congo 


392 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Imperialism 


Imperialism 
and  national 
greatness 


was  accomplished  partly  by  forcing  the  natives  to  labor, 
and  such  stories  of  cruel  brutality  began  to  spread  around 
the  world  that  the  administration  of  the  Congo  became  a 
great  scandal.  After  much  contention  the  rights  of  Leo- 
pold were  purchased  by  the  Belgian  Government  in  1908, 
the  Congo  Free  State  was  annexed  by  Belgium,  and  re- 
forms were  introduced  there. 

Imperialism,  the  getting  and  holding  colonial  empire, 
was  probably  an  inevitable  stage  in  the  evolution  of  man- 
kind. It  resulted  partly  from  the  superior  power  of  some 
of  the  European  nations  and  their  greater  ambitions  which 
developed,  partly  because  of  the  changes  which  accom- 
panied the  Industrial  Revolution.  After  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  railroad  and  the  steamship  the  world  seemed 
smaller  and  its  parts  closer  together.  As  a  consequence  of 
changes  in  the  nineteenth  century  the  population  and  the 
industries  of  Europe  greatly  expanded.  The  surplus 
population  of  England,  Italy,  and  Germany  went  outside 
to  other  places.  Australia,  New  Zealand,  Canada, 
South  Africa  were  all  built  up  by  such  emigration,  while 
the  abler  or  the  more  adventurous  went  forth  to  such 
countries  as  India  and  Egypt  to  direct  and  govern  the 
natives.  For  a  long  time  great  numbers  of  Germans  left 
their  homes,  and  many  Italians  went  also,  but  they  settled 
in  the  possessions  of  other  powers,  and  were  lost  to  the 
countries  that  produced  them.  There  was  nothing 
which  German  leaders  lamented  more  than  that  Ger- 
many had  no  colonies  to  which  her  emigrants  would 
go  and  there  develop  a  greater  and  vaster  German 
Empire.  Moreover,  the  expanding  industrialism  of  coun- 
tries like  the  German  Empire  and  Great  Britain  fostered 
an  increasing  population,  which  could  not  be  supported  by 
domestic  agriculture  and  which  could  get  its  food  only  by 
selling  manufactured  products  abroad.  Often  it  seemed 
to  imperialists  that  these  manufactures  could  be  best  sold 
in  colonial  possessions,  and  it  was  true  that  the  colonies  of 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION 


393 


Britain  and  France  })on^'lit  many  thinf^s  from  them. 
Furthermore,  industriahsm  depended  on  a  supply  of  raw 
materials.  A  considerable  portion  of  such  products  was 
in  the  colonial  empires,  especially  of  Great  Britain,  Hol- 
land, and  France.  After  the  old  colonial  system  was 
ended  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  Britain 
did  not  bar  other  countries  from  trading  with  her  colonies, 
but  some  powers  were  not  so  liberal,  and  there  was  always 
the  possibility  that  a  state  might  attempt  to  monopolize 
the  resources  of  its  colonial  possessions.  So,  German 
imperialists  believed  it  necessary  for  Germany's  greatness 
that  lands  producing  cotton,  copper,  rubber,  and  oil 
should  be  taken  and  held. 

Even  when  it  was  doubtful  whether  the  mass  of  the 
people  would  be  benefited  by  colonial  acquisitions,  and 
very  doubtful  whether  colonies  were  wanted  by  them, 
individuals  who  hoped  to  gain  special  privileges  of  great 
wealth,  or  who  wanted  protection  for  their  investments, 
were  often  able  to  arouse  the  patriotism  of  the  rest  of  the 
people  and  their  love  of  greatness  and  glory  for  their 
country,  and  lead  them  on  to  support  colonial  adventure. 
And  just  as  small  businesses  were  being  consolidated  into 
great  corporations,  so  a  large  part  of  the  resources  of  the 
earth  were  being  gathered  into  the  possession  of  the 
principal  powers.  It  seemed  to  many  that  the  future 
lay  only  with  those  powers,  like  Russia  and  the  United 
States,  which  had  vast  territory  in  which  to  expand,  or 
with  those  like  Great  Britain  and  France,  which  had  ob- 
tained colonies  over  the  sea.  The  German  desire  to  get 
more  territory  or  colonies  while  time  still  remained  was 
probably  one  of  the  major  causes  of  the  Great  War. 

The  subject  populations  were,  probably,  on  the  whole, 
better  off  than  they  would  have  been  if  left  to  themselves. 
That  some  of  them  were  harshly  and  cruelly  treated,  that 
at  best  they  had  usually  an  inferior  status,  that  they  were 
often  exploited,  that  they  were  ruled  by  aliens,  that  de- 


Colonies  and 

industrial 

development 


Patriotism 

and 

colonies 


Subject 
colonial 
populations 


394 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Not  allowed 
to  govern 
themselves 


Sense  of 

responsibil- 
ity in  ruling 
countries 


mocracy  and  self-government  were  never  extended  to 
them,  that  they  were  denied  many  things  which  their 
European  masters  had,  is  quite  true.  If  all  this  be  con- 
sidered from  the  point  of  view  of  what  European  liberals 
wanted  for  themselves,  it  appears  very  lamentable  indeed. 
But  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  people  of  Algeria,  of 
India,  of  Egypt,  and  of  Burma  had  not  been  able  to 
develop  democracy  or  much  well  being  for  the  masses; 
that  the  negroes  of  Africa  were  far  down  in  the  scale  of 
mankind,  and  that  those  who  could  survive  were  being 
rapidly  lifted  up  through  whole  stages  of  human  progress. 
Whatever  evils  attended  imperialism,  and  they  were  not 
few  or  small,  it  is  probable  that  the  peoples  affected  were 
benefited  and  prepared  for  things  better  to  come.  It  is 
certain,  also,  that  Americans  and  Englishmen  and  French- 
men were  coming  to  have  greater  concern  for  their  re- 
sponsibilities and  ever-greater  desire  to  protect  and  im- 
prove the  condition  of  the  peoples  over  whom  they  ruled. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General:  Paul  Leroy-Beaulieu,  De  la  Colonisation  chez  les 
Peuples  Modernes,  2  vols.  (6th  ed.  1908);  Alfred  Zimmermann, 
Die  Europdische  Kolonien,  5  vols.  (1896-1903),  with  bibliog- 
raphies and  maps;  S.  P.  Orth,  The  Imperial  Impulse  (1916); 
P.  S.  Reinsch,  World  Politics  at  the  End  of  the  Nineteenth  Century 
(1900). 

The  British  Empire:  E.  G.  Hawke,  The  British  Empire  and 
Its  History  (1911);  C.  F.  Lavell  and  C.  E.  Payne,  Imperial 
England  (1919);  Sir  C.  P.  Lucas,  The  British  Empire  (1915),  A 
Historical  Geography  of  the  British  Colonies,  12  vols.  (ed.  1916), 
Greater  Rome  and  Greater  Britain  (1912);  The  Oxford  Survey  of 
the  British  Empire,  ed.  by  A.  J.  Herbertson  and  O.  J.  R.  Ho- 
warth,  6  vols.  (1914);  A.  F.  Pollard,  editor,  The  British  Empire: 
Its  Past,  Its  Present,  and  Its  Future  (1909);  A.  J.  Sargent,  Sea- 
ways of  the  Empire  (1918);  W.  H.  Woodward,  A  Short  History 
of  the  Expansion  of  the  British  Empire,  1500-1911  (3d  ed.  1912). 
Sir  Charles  Dilke,  Problems  of  Greater  Britain  (1890),  The 
British  Empire  (1899);  H.  E.  Egerton,  Federations  and  Unions 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  395 

Within  the  British  Empire  (1911);  R.  Jebb,  The  Imperial  Con- 
ference, 2  vols.  (1911). 

British  East  Africa:  Captain  F.  D.  Luj^'ard,  Rise  of  Our  East 
African  Empire,  2  vols.  (189.'}). 

Australia:  G.  W.  Ru.sden,  Ilistorij  of  Australia,  3  vols.  (1883); 
II.  G.  Turner,  The  First  Decade  of  the  Australian  Common- 
wealth (1911). 

Canada:  Sir  J.G.BoMrin()t,Ca//f;^/a  Under  British  Rule,  J7G0- 
PJOO  (1900);  F.  X.  Garncau,  Ilistoire  du  Canada,{r){hvi\.,t\\. 
by  H.  Garneau),  2  vols.  (1920);  William  Kinj^sford,  Uistiny  of 
Canada,  10  vols.  (1887-97),  the  fullest  account,  to  18-H;  S.  J. 
Reid,  Life  and  Letters  of  the  First  Earl  of  Durham,  2  vols.  (1906) ; 
Lord  Durham\^  Report  on  the  Affairs  of  British  North  America, 
ed.  by  Sir  C.  P.  Lucas,  3  vols.  (1912). 

Egypt:  Sir  A.  Colvin,  The  Making  of  Modern  Egypt  (190G); 
Earl  of  Cromer,  Modern  Egypt,  2  vols.  (1908),  best  account  of; 
E.  Dicey,  The  Story  of  the  Khedive  (1902);  C.  de  Freycinet,  La 
Question  d'Egypte  (190.5);  E.  Gaignerot,  La  Question  d'flgypte 
(1901);  Alfred  (Lord)  Milner,  England  in  Egypt  (1892);  II. 
Resener,  Aigypten  unter  Englischer  Okkupation  (1896);  A.  E. 
P.  B.  Weigall,  A  History  of  Events  in  Egypt  from  1798  to  1914 
(191.5);  A.  S.  White,  The  Expansion  of  Egypt  (1899);  F.  R. 
Wingate,  Mahdism  and  the  Egyptian  Sudan  (1891). 

India:  V.  A.  Smith,  The  Oxford  History  of  India:  from  the 
Earliest  Times  to  the  End  of  1911  (1919),  excellent  for  an  intro- 
duction; Sir  T.  W.  Ilolderness,  Peoples  and  Problems  of  India 
(1912),  excellent;  Sir  J.  B.  Fuller,  The  Empire  of  India  (1913); 
Sir  Courtney  Ilbert,  The  Government  of  India  (3d  ed.  1915); 
Sir  John  Strachey,  India:  Its  Administration  and  Progress 
(3d  ed.  1903);  Lovat  Eraser,  India  Under  Curzon  and  After 
(1911);  Lord  Frederick  Roberts,  Forty-one  Years  in  India,  2 
vols.  (1898);  Sir  Valentine  Chirol,  The  Middle  Eaatern  Question, 
or  Some  Political  Problems  of  Indian  Defense  (1903);  G.  N.  C. 
(Earl)  Curzon,  Frontiers  (1908);  P.  Loudon,  The  Unveiling  of 
Lhasa  (1905);  Sir  Theodore  Morison,  The  Economic  Transition 
in  India  (1911);  Lajpat  Rai,  Young  India  (1916),  England's 
Debt  to  India  (1917),  hostile. 

Malaysia:  Arnold  Wright  and  T.  H.  Reid,  The  Malay  Penin- 
sida  (1912);  One  Hundred  Years  of  Singapore,  ed.  by  W.  Make- 
peace, Dr.  G.  E.  Brooke,  R.  St.  J.  Braddell,  2  vols.  (1920). 

South  Africa:  F.  R.  Cana,  South  Africa  from  the  Great  Trek  to 
the  Union  (1909);  G.  E.  Cory,  The  Rise  of  South  Africa,  volumes 


S96  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

I-III  (1910-19);  W.  B.  Worsfold,  Lord  Milner's  Work  in  South 
Africa  (1906),  The  Union  of  South  Africa  (1912).  On  the  Boer 
War:  The  Times  History  of  the  War  in  South  Africa,  1899- 
1900,  edited  by  L.  S.  Amery,  4  vols.  (1900). 

New  Zealand:  G.  W.  Rusden,  History  of  New  Zealand,  3  vols. 
(1883). 

The  French  colonies:  Marcel  Dubois  and  Auguste  Terrier, 
Un  Siecle  d' Expansion  Coloniale,  1800-1900  (ed.  1902);  Jules 
Duval,  Les  Colonies  et  la  Politique  Coloniale  de  la  France  (1864) ; 
£mile  Levasseur,  La  France  et  Ses  Colonies,  3  vols.  (1890-3); 
Alfred  Rambaud  and  others,  La  France  Coloniale  (6th  ed.  1893). 

Algeria:  Jules  Cambon,  Le  Gouvernement  Generale  de  VAlge- 
rie,  1891-7  (1918). 

Indo-China :  Albert  Gaisman,  UCEuvre  de  la  France  au  Tonkin 
(1906);  J.  M.  A.  de  Lanessan,  La  Colonisation  Frangaise  en 
Indo-Chine  (1895) ;  C.  Lemire,  La  France  et  le  Siam  (1903). 

Madagascar:  L.  Brunet,  La  France  a  Madagascar,  1815-1895 
(2d  ed.  1895). 

Morocco:  A.  Bernard,  Le  Maroc  (1913);  E.  Dupuy,  Comment 
Nous  Avons  Conquis  le  Maroc,  1845-1912  (1913);  A.  Gourdin, 
La  Politique  Frangaise  au  Maroc  (1906);  V.  Piquet,  Le  Maroc 
(1917). 

Tunisia:  N.  Fancon,  La  Tunisie  avant  et  depuis  V Occupation 
Frangaise,  2  vols.  (1893);  E.  Fitoussi,  L'^tat  Tunisien,  Son 
Origine,  Son  Developpement  et  Son  Organisation  Actuelle  {1525- 
1901)  (1901). 

The  German  colonies:  Kurt  Hassert,  Deutschlands  Kolonien 
(2d  ed.  1910);  P.  E.  Lewin,  The  Germans  and  Africa  (1915);  H. 
Mayer.  Das  Deutsche  Kolonialreich,  2  vols.  (1909) ;  Alfred  Zim- 
mermann,  Geschichte  der  Deidschen  Kolonialpolitik  (1914). 

Italy  in  Africa:  A.  B.  Wylde,  Modern  Abyssinia  (1901); 
W.  K.  McClure,  Italy  in  North  Africa  (1913);  Sir  Thomas 
Barclay,  The  Turco-Italian  War  and  Its  Problems  (1912);  A. 
Rapisardi-Mirabelli,  La  Guerre  Italo-Turque  et  le  Droit  des 
Gens  (1913). 

Belgium  and  the  Congo :  G.  Blanchard,  Formation  et  Constitu- 
tion Politique  de  VEtat  Independant  du  Congo  (1899);  R.  Brunet, 
U Annexation  du  Congo  a  la  Belgique  et  le  Droit  International 
(1911) ;  A.  B.  Keith,  The  Belgian  Congo  and  the  Berlin  Act  (1919) ; 
J.  S.  Reeves,  The  International  Beginnings  of  the  Congo  Free 
State  (1894);  E.  Vandervelde,  La  Belgique  et  le  Congo  (1911); 
A.  Vermeersch,  La  Question  Congolaise  (1906). 


IMPERIAL    EXPANSION  397 

Africa:  Baron  Beyens,  La  Question  AJricaine  (1918);  N.  D. 
Harris.  Intervention  and  (Colonization  in  Africa  (1914);  Sir  H.  H. 
Johnston,  A  History  of  the  Colonization  of  Africa  by  Alien  Races 
(1899),  The  Opening  up  of  Africa  (1911);  J.  Keltic,  The  Partition 
of  Africa  (1898);  Raymond  Ronzc,  La  Question  (VAfrique  (1918); 
A.  S.  ^\^litc,  The  Development  of  Africa  ("2(1  cd.  189^2);  E.  L. 
Catcllani,  Le  Colonie  e  la  Conferenza  di  Berlino  (1885),  best  on 
this  subject;  H.  Queneuil,  La  Conference  de  Bruxelles  et  Ses  Resul- 
tats  (1907),  for  the  Brussels  anti-slavery  conference  of  1890; 
Sir  Edward  llertslet,  The  Map  of  Africa  by  Treaty  3  vols.  (2d  ed. 
1896):  and  H.  A.  Gibbons,  The  New  Map  of  Africa  (1916). 

The  Far  East:  Sir  R.  K.  Douglas,  Europe  and  the  Far  East, 
1506-1912  (1913),  best;  Ix)rd  Curzon,  Problems  of  the  Far  East 
(ed.  1896);  £.  Driault,  La  Question  d'Extreme  Orient  (1908), 
excellent;  A.  J.  Brown,  The  Mastery  of  the  Far  East  (1919) ;  S.  K. 
Hornbeck,  Contemporary  Politics  in  the  Far  East  (1916);  T.  E 
Millard,  The  New  Far  East  (1906);  B.  L.  Putnam-Weale,  Re- 
Shaping  of  the  Far  East,  2  vols.  (1905),  Tlw  Truce  in  the  East 
(1907). 

China:  H.  Cordier,  Ilistoire  des  Relations  de  la  Chine  avec  les 
Puissances  Occidcntales,  lSGO-1902  (1902);  H.  Thompson,  China 
and  the  Powers  (1902) ;  J.  O.  P.  Bland,  Recent  Events  and  Present 
Policies  in  Chijia  (1912);  P.  H.  Clements,  The  Boxer  Rebellion 
(1915);  H.  A.  Giles,  China  and  the  Chinese  (1902),  The  Civiliza- 
tion of  China  (1911),  China  and  the  Manchus  (1912),  all  excellent 
for  the  beginner:  H.  H.  Gowen,  An  Outline  History  of  China 
(1913);  P.  H.  Kent,  The  Passing  of  the  Manchus  (1912);  A.  H. 
Smith,  China  in  Convulsion  (1901). 

Korea:  H.  B.  Hurlbert,  The  Passing  of  Korea  (1906);  G.  T. 
Ladd,  In  Korea  with  Marquis  Ito  (1908). 

Japan:  K.  K.  Kawakami,  Japan  in  World  Politics  (1917); 
Lancelot  Lawton,  Empires  of  the  Far  East,  2  vols.  (1912),  about 
Japan,  China,  and  Manchuria;  F.  McCormick,  The  Menace  of 
Japan  (1917). 

Persia:  Lieut. -Col.  P.  M.  Sykes,  A  History  of  Persia,  2  vols. 
(1915),  down  to  1906;  V.  Bcrard,  Revolutions  de  la  Perse  (1910); 
E.  G.  Browne,  The  Persian  Revolution  of  1905-1909  (1910) ;  Lord 
Curzon,  Persia  and  the  Persian  Question,  2  vols.  (1892);  W.  M. 
Shuster,  The  Strangling  of  Persia  (1912). 

Asia:  A.  T.  Mahan,  The  Problem  of  Asia  (1900);  H.  A.  Gib- 
bons, The  New  Map  of  Asia  {1900-1919)  (1919). 


CHAPTER  XV 

TRIPLE  ALLIANCE  AND  THE 
ENTENTES 

.  .  .  I'aigle  provoque  prendra  son  vol,  saisira  rennemi  dans  ses 
serres  acerees,  et  le  rendra  inoffensif.  Nous  nous  souviendrons 
alors  que  les  provinces  de  I'ancien  empire  allemand:  Comte  de 
Bourgognc  et  une  belle  part  de  la  Lorraine,  sont  encore  aux  mains 
des  Francs;  que  des  milliers  de  freres  allemands  des  provinces  bal- 
tiques  gemissent  sous  le  joug  slave.  C'est  une  question  nationale 
de  rendre  a  TAUemagne  ce  qu'elle  a  autrefois  possede. 

Alleged  secret  German  official  report,  communicated  by  the 
French  Minister  of  War  to  the  French  Minister  of  Foreign 
Affairs,  April  2,  1913. 

Immer  enger  werden  die  Maschen  des  Netzes,  in  die  es  der  franzo- 
sischen  Diplomatic  gelingt,  England  zu  verstricken.  Schon  in  den 
ersten  Phasen  des  Marokkokonflickts  hat  bekanntlich  England 
an  Frankreich  Zusagen  militarischer  Natur  gemacht. 
Die  Englische  Flotte  ubernimmt  den  Schutz  der  Nordsee,  des 
Kanals  und  des  Atlantischen  Ozeans.  .  .  .  Die  Englische 
Regierung  spielt  ein  gefahrliches  Spiel. 

A  report  of  1913,  published  in  the  Norddeutsche  Allgemeine 
Zeitmig,  October  16,  1914. 

Preemi-  FoR  a  generation  after  the  Franco-German  War  the 

nence  of  the      German    Empire    enjoyed    midisputed    preeminence    in 
German  Europe,  not  only  because  of  its  own  enormous  strength, 

1871-1904  t)ut  from  the  fact  that  it  was  the  head  of  the  Triple  Al- 
liance with  Italy  and  Austria-Hungary.  Even  after  the 
arrangement  between  France  and  Russia  in  1892-3  the 
supremacy  of  Germany  was  not  seriously  disturbed.  This 
Dual  Alliance  was  regarded  with  suspicion  not  only  by  the 
rival  alliance  but  by  Great  Britain  as  well.  Therefore, 
do^vn  to  1900,  at  least,  and  actually  for  a  few  years  after 
that  time,  the  German  Empire  continued  to  be  what  it 

398 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES      399 


had  been  during  the  later  period  of  Bismarck,  the  domi- 
nant power  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  And,  indeed, 
it  did  more  than  hold  its  phice;  for  aml)ition  increasing 
with  the  marvellous  expansion  of  its  power,  it  became  year 
by  year  stronger  and  more  magnificent  to  friends  and 
admirers,  more  threatening  and  terrible  to  the  others.  It 
was  this  increase  in  power  and  am])ition  that  brought 
about  the  large  diplomatic  changes  that  now  shortly  came 
to  pass. 

Hitherto  the  weaker  Dual  Alliance  had  confronted  the 
stronger  Triple  Alliance,  with  Britain  on  the  outskirts  of 
Europe,  aloof  from  Continental  affairs,  and  usually  more 
friendly  toward  Germany  than  either  Russia  or  France. 
In  1904  England  and  France  settled  their  differences 
and  made  an  arrangement,  the  Entente  Cordiale,  which 
was  not  an  alliance  but  in  the  end  proved  to  be  just  as 
effective  as  one,  and  three  years  later,  when  England  and 
Russia  settled  their  differences  also,  in  the  Anglo-Russian 
Accord,  Dual  Alliance  and  Entente  Cordiale  coalesced 
in  a  vaster  combination,  the  Triple  Entente.  Thereafter 
Europe  was  practically  divided  into  two  great  combina- 
tions; and  the  Triple  Entente  was  so  strong  that  Ger- 
many's old  position  of  easy  superiority  was  gone.  The 
hegemony  of  the  German  Empire,  established  when  Bis- 
marck kept  her  enemies  divided,  had  passed.  During  this 
later  time  the  German  leaders  tried  to  recover  the  old 
position  and  dictate  their  will  to  the  others.  Four  times 
did  they  attempt  this,  and  each  time  a  crisis  resulted 
which  shook  the  European  structure  and  seemed  to  lead 
straight  to  war.  On  two  of  these  occasions,  the  ]Morocco 
Crisis  of  1905  and  the  Affair  of  Bosnia-Herzegovina 
in  1908-9,  Germany  won  signal  triumph,  and  seemed 
to  be  master  once  more.  Twice,  in  the  JNIorocco  Crisis 
of  1911  and  the  crisis  that  arose  concerning  the  Bal- 
kans in  1912,  discomfiture  came.  Each  time,  in  the  end, 
war  was  avoided.      But   the   tension   gradually   became 


Europe 
divided: 
rival  com- 
binations, 
19C4-1914 


The  great 
crises 


400 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Great 
Britain  and 
France 


The 

Entente 

CordialOf 

1904 


SO  great  that  increasingly  people  believed  another  such 
difference  would  make  it  difficult  to  avoid  war  again.  The 
fifth  crisis  came  in  1914,  after  the  Austrian  ultimatum  to 
Servia.     Then  the  dread  catastrophe  followed. 

The  origin  of  the  Entente  Cordiale  may  be  traced  to  one 
great  cause:  fear  of  Germany  in  England  and  in  France. 
The  nations  to  the  north  and  south  of  the  English  Channel 
had  been  rivals  or  enemies  for  ages,  and  so  different  were 
the  character  and  ideals  of  the  two  that  rarely  had  they 
been  able  to  regard  each  other  with  much  sympathy  and 
understanding.  In  the  last  part  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury it  might  well  have  seemed  hopeless  ever  to  attempt 
to  bring  them  together,  and  Bismarck  had  not  found 
any  effort  needed  to  keep  them  apart.  As  late  as  1898 
England  and  France  had  been  very  near  to  war.  But 
France  had  once  been  under  the  German's  heel  and  had 
never  forgotten ;  for  thirty  years  she  had  lived  right  beside 
a  neighbor  who  had  often  been  arrogant  and  sometimes 
threatening;  Germany  was  growing  in  population  and 
power  so  much  more  rapidly  than  France  as  to  make 
Frenchmen  see  that  in  another  war  they  could  have  little 
chance,  and  a  new  school  of  French  leaders  believed  that 
some  day  such  a  conflict  could  not  be  avoided.  Accord- 
ingly, after  1898,  with  the  passing  of  Hanotaux,  who  dis- 
liked Britain  and  preferred  German  friendship,  a  new 
group  came  into  power,  among  whom  Theophile  Delcasse 
shortly  became  most  important.  It  was  their  belief 
that  France  had  best  seek  the  friendship  of  England. 

The  old  school  was  passing  in  Great  Britain  also.  Queen 
Victoria's  German  husband  had  died  long  before,  she 
herself  died  in  1901,  and  a  year  later  the  Marquis  of 
Salisbury.  The  German  naval  laws  of  1898  and  1900  were 
making  the  new  generation  of  Englishmen  have  an  appre- 
hension of  Germany  that  those  before  never  had.  It  be- 
gan to  be  said  that  Britain  could  no  longer,  such  were  the 
changed  conditions  recently  developed,  afford  to  maintain 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       401 


her  "splendid  isolation";  that  she  must  have  her  own 
friends  to  stand  with  if  there  were  need.  Foremost 
among  them  was  the  new  king,  Edward  VII,  who  was 
fond,  moreover,  of  France.  So,  in  1904  France  and 
England  signed  an  agreement  by  which  they  amicably 
adjusted  all  their  differences  everywhere,  France  ac- 
quiescing in  the  British  occupation  of  Egypt,  against 
which  she  had  often  protested,  and  Britain  promising  to 
support  France  in  her  plan  to  get  possession  of  Morocco: 
"The  two  governments  agree  to  afford  each  other  their 
diplomatic  support."  It  was  afterward  seen,  on  the 
publication  of  the  secret  articles  in  1911,  that  the  two 
powers,  while  not  making  an  alliance,  had  given  each  other 
assurances  of  assistance,  should  it  be  needed.  In  1914 
Sir  Edward  Grey  laid  before  the  House  of  Commons 
correspondence  which  had  passed  between  Britain  and 
France  two  years  before  with  respect  to  cooperation  of 
their  navies.  In  1904  an  alliance  was  not,  perhaps,  de- 
sired, and  would  probably  not  have  been  tolerated  by 
many  people  in  either  of  the  countries.  Moreover,  it 
was  said  then  that  Germany  was  resolved  that  such  an 
alliance  should  not  take  place,  and  was  willing  to  go  to 
war  to  prevent  it. 

AMien  the  terms  of  the  Entente  were  made  known  Ger- 
many seemed  at  first  to  make  little  objection.  "There  is 
no  need  ...  to  take  umbrage,"  said  a  German  news- 
paper in  which  semi-official  announcements  were  made. 
But  the  kaiser  soon  spoke  of  the  great  days  of  the  German 
past,  and  of  need  for  courage  in  trials  that  might  be  ap- 
proaching. A  little  later  Germany  intervened  with  terrible 
brusqueness.  March  31, 1905,  the  kaiser  suddenly  landed 
at  Tangier,  opposite  Gibraltar,  in  Morocco,  and  told  the 
sultan  that  he  would  uphold  his  sovereign  power.  To 
France  this  was  as  direct  a  challenge  as  could  be  made,  for, 
following  the  conclusion  of  the  Entente,  Frenchmen  were 
making  ready  to  end  the  anarchy  which  had  long  existed 


"Splendid 
isolation" 
abandoned 


The  Kaiser 
at  Tangier 


402 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


France  not 
able  to  resist 


Secret 
Treaty  of 
Bjorko,  1905 


The  first 
Morocco 
Crisis, 
1905 


in  ^Morocco,  and  round  out  their  north  African  empire  by 
taking  Morocco  for  themselves.  After  the  kaiser's  sudden 
assertion  it  was  evident  that  France  must,  at  Germany's 
behest,  give  up  the  enterprise  or  risk  almost  certain  war. 

The  moment  was  well  chosen  for  Germany's  move. 
France  herself  was  weak  and  in  no  condition  to  fight  a 
great  war.  It  was  by  no  means  certain  yet  how  far 
Britain  would  support  her,  or,  in  view  of  political  condi- 
tions in  the  British  Isles,  how  far  she  could  give  support. 
Worst  of  all,  no  help  could  be  expected  from  Russia.  She 
was  involved  in  a  war  with  Japan,  in  which  she  had  under- 
gone repeated  defeats,  and  just  suffered  the  great  disaster 
of  Mukden.  In  the  course  of  the  struggle,  rebellion  and 
disorder  had  arisen  in  her  realm,  so  that  she  was  now  dis- 
tracted and  weak.  She  had  received  no  vital  hurt,  but 
for  the  moment  her  power  and  prestige  were  gone,  and 
her  condition  was  such  that  years  of  recuperation  would 
be  needed.  Furthermore,  we  know  now,  what  may  have 
been  suspected  but  was  not  known  then,  that  the  German 
emperor  had  been  secretly  intriguing  with  the  tsar,  over 
whose  weak  character  his  own  obtained  easy  ascendancy. 
He  was  busily  endeavoring  to  have  Russia  attach  herself 
to  Germany  against  England,  who,  he  said,  was  the  real 
enemy,  and  have  her  bring  France  into  a  Continental 
combination,  which  Germany  should  lead.  A  few  months 
after  this  time,  in  July,  1905,  kaiser  and  tsar  met  on 
board  a  vessel  at  Bjorko  in  the  Baltic,  and  there  signed  a 
secret  treaty  directed  against  England.  This  engagement 
was  rejected  by  the  Russian  ministers  and  so  not  accepted 
by  the  Russian  Government,  but  such  negotiations  tem- 
porarily weakened  the  Dual  Alliance. 

It  was  a  terrible  moment  for  France;  but  she  was  not 
prepared  to  fight,  and  so  had  to  yield  to  a  great  humilia- 
tion. There  was  in  Paris  at  this  time  a  German,  Count 
Haenckel  von  Donnersmarck,  whose  business  was  not 
known,  but  who  was  understood  to  be  the  unofficial  repre- 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       403 


sentative  of  the  kaiser.  To  a  French  newspaper  lie  gave 
out  an  interview  the  meaning  of  which  was  not  to  be  mis- 
taken: M.  Delcasse's  policy  was  dangerous  to  Germany 
and  was  leading  to  war;  in  such  a  war  France  might  win, 
but  if  she  did  not  tlie  peace  would  be  dictated  in  Paris;  he 
meant  his  advice  kindly:  "Give  up  the  minister."  And 
this  was  done,  for  as  late  as  1905  Germany  could  still 
command  and  France  obey.  Delcasse  was  forced  to 
resign,  and  France  was  not  only  compelled  to  yield  with 
respect  to  her  Moroccan  policy,  but  was  virtually  forced 
to  appear  before  a  European  conference,  which  was  called 
to  sit  upon  the  matter  at  Algeciras,  in  Spain,  over  the  bay 
from  Gibraltar. 

Actually  German  diplomacy  had  gone  too  far,  and  at 
the  Conference  held  in  1906,  to  which  the  United  States 
sent  representatives,  much  less  was  gained  than  had  been 
the  case  six  months  before.  The  French  had  diligently 
strengthened  their  military  resources,  and  the  English, 
who  had  perhaps  been  more  willing  to  go  to  war  than  the 
French  in  1905,  continued  resolute,  while  Russia  was  now 
at  peace.  The  French  presented  their  case  much  more 
skilfully  than  the  Germans,  who  had  relied  too  greatly 
on  mere  display  of  force,  and  France  gained  a  large  part 
of  what  she  wanted;  for  to  France  and  Spain  jointly  was 
given  the  task  of  preserving  order  in  Morocco.  The  re- 
sults of  the  affair  were  none  the  less  a  large  triumph  for 
Germany.  She  had  not,  indeed,  succeeded  in  breaking 
up  the  Entente  Cordiale,  which  she  much  desired  to  ac- 
complish; and  it  was  seen  now  that  the  agreement  was 
stronger  than  ever;  nor  had  she  imposed  upon  France  as 
great  a  humiliation  as  at  first  had  seemed  likely.  But 
she  had  forbidden  France  to  take  Morocco,  and  France 
had  yielded,  and  at  her  behest  a  French  minister  of  foreign 
affairs  had  been  driven  from  office.  Apparently  the  posi- 
tion of  Germany  in  Europe  was  as  high  as  in  the  days  when 
France  stood  almost  alone. 


Warning  to 
France 


The  Con- 
ference of 
Algeciras, 
1906 


404 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Great 
Britain  and 
Russia 


The  Anglo- 
Russian  Ac- 
cord, 1907 


If  fear  of  Germany  and  trend  of  diplomatic  events  had 
drawn  France  and  Great  Britain  together  in  an  under- 
standing which  grew  closer  all  the  time,  the  same  forces 
tended  to  draw  together  Russia  and  Great  Britain,  and,  in 
effect,  form  a  combination  of  Great  Britain,  Russia,  and 
France.  This  was  made  easier  because  of  the  Russo- 
Japanese  War.  For  a  long  while  British  statesmen  had 
believed  that  as  France  was  the  nearest  and  most  imme- 
diate danger,  so,  farther  away,  the  great  danger  came  from 
Russia.  Russia  had  long  been  steadily  expanding  her 
dominion  in  Asia,  slowly,  but  in  a  manner  that  seemed  not 
to  be  resisted.  Many  Englishmen  believed  that  this  prog- 
ress would  one  day  bring  the  Russians  down  to  India,  to 
the  Persian  Gulf,  and  even  to  the  Mediterranean,  and  that 
it  might  threaten  the  British  Empire  with  destruction. 
It  was  for  this  reason  that  England  had  joined  with 
France  to  protect  Turkey  in  the  Crimean  War,  and  later 
had  successfully  opposed  Russia  after  the  Russo-Turkish 
War  in  1878.  With  respect  to  India  the  danger  seemed 
even  greater,  for  if  the  Russian  Empire  expanded  down  to 
the  Indian  frontier  it  was  conceivable  that  at  last  the 
country  might  be  invaded  with  a  great  army  wliich  Britain, 
thousands  of  miles  away,  could  never  resist.  For  some 
years  before  the  war  with  Japan  Russia  seemed  to  have 
turned  away  from  European  interests  and  to  be  en- 
grossed with  advancing  in  Asia,  so  that  Great  Britain 
was  more  and  more  apprehensive. 

But  after  1905,  when  Russia  defeated  seemed  less  dan- 
gerous than  before,  she  again  turned  back  to  Europe,  and, 
as  was  soon  seen,  entered  into  rivalry  with  Germany 
rather  than  Great  Britain.  All  this  took  place  at  a  time 
when  British  suspicion  and  dread  of  the  German  Empire 
were  steadily  increasing.  It  took  place  also  at  a  time 
when  France,  the  ally  of  Russia,  was  becoming  ever  more 
closely  bound  to  England.  The  result  of  all  these  fac- 
tors was  that  in  1907  the  British  and  the  Russian  govern- 


V      a       0       O  ^        y 


s 

cn 


2 


53:- 

^ 

:^ 

^ 

J  "^ 

:e: 

«-- 

li) 

5s  Cij 

'^ 

• 

o 

'^j 

^ 

CO 

O 

c 

E^ 

£«" 

« 

'^ 

s     ° 


s;        oo        a-    -o 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       40.5 


merits  settled  their  differences  in  friendly  and  generous 
spirit  much  as  France  and  England  had  done  shortly 
before.  In  this  arrangement  Russia  agreed  that  the  con- 
trolling influence  in  Afghanistan  and  in  Tibet  should  be 
held  by  Great  Britain,  who  thus  got  a  secure  frontier  for 
India,  and  practically  Persia  was  divided  between  the  two 
powers.  After  1907  there  were,  over  against  the  Triple 
Alliance,  the  secret  agreement  between  Russia  and  France 
or  the  Dual  Alliance,  the  Entente  Cordiale  of  Great  Britain 
and  France,  and  the  Anglo-Russian  Accord  of  Great 
Britain  and  Russia,  These  three  arrangements  now 
came  to  be  spoken  of  together  as  the  Triple  Entente,  and 
for  the  next  seven  years  men  understood  that  Europe 
was  dominated  by  the  two  rival  combinations.  Triple 
Alliance  and  Triple  Entente. 

But  while  this  was  destined  to  check  Germany  soon,  it 
could  not  do  so  at  once,  and  in  the  very  next  year,  in 
company  with  her  principal  ally,  she  secured  another  more 
signal  triumph.  This  time  it  was  in  the  east  of  Europe,  and 
had  to  do  with  the  greatest  of  Teutonic  interests,  control  of 
the  Balkans.  In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed  Bosnia 
and  Herzegovina,  in  spite  of  a  general  European  treaty,  the 
Treaty  of  Berlin,  and  in  direct  defiance  of  Russia's  wishes. 

By  the  Treaty  made  under  the  auspices  of  the  Congress 
of  Berlin  the  two  Turkish  provinces  of  Bosnia  and  Herze- 
govina had  been  put  under  the  control  of  Austria-Hungary, 
though  sovereignty  continued  to  be  vested  in  Turkey. 
Actual  connection  with  Turkey  ceased,  however,  and  the 
government  of  the  Dual  IMonarchy  set  to  work  to  bring 
order  to  the  districts  and  make  them  thoroughly  sub- 
servient to  its  rule.  The  people  were  largely  debarred 
from  professional  and  governmental  positions  and  treated 
as  inferior  to  Hungarians  or  Germans,  but  considerable 
material  prosperity  was  brought  about,  and  in  many 
respects  the  condition  of  the  South  Slavs  in  these  provinces 
was  better  than  the  condition  of  those  who  ruled  themselves 


The  Triple 

Entente, 

1907-14 


The  Bosnia- 
Herzegovina 
Crisis, 
1908-9 


Bosnia  and 
Herzego- 
vina, 
1878-1908 


406 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Young 
Turk  Revo- 
lution 


Austria- 
Hungary 
annexes 
Bosnia  and 
Herzego- 
vina 


in  the  neighboring  states  of  Servia  and  Montenegro.  As 
time  went  on,  Austria-Hungary  came  to  regard  them  as 
really  a  part  of  her  domain,  and  Turkish  ownership  rather 
as  a  fiction.  Thus  things  continued  until  1908.  In  that 
year  occurred  the  so-called  Young  Turk  Revolution  in  the 
Ottoman  Empire,  in  which  the  older  regime  was  over- 
throwTi  by  a  band  of  zealous  young  leaders.  They  wished 
to  make  reforms,  but  they  desired  above  all  things  to 
restore  Turkish  greatness,  and  believed  that  this  could 
be  done  only  by  reviving  a  spirit  of  Turkish  nationalism 
and  welding  all  parts  of  the  Empire  together.  Ignoring 
the  Austrian  possession  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina,  the 
Young  Turks  invited  the  population  of  the  provinces  to 
send  representatives  to  an  assembly  in  Constantinople. 
This  seemed  an  attempt  to  prepare  for  Turkish  possession 
of  the  country  again  if  later  on  that  could  be  brought 
about.  But  in  the  generation  that  had  elapsed  since 
the  beginning  of  Austrian  occupation  the  provinces  had 
become  more  and  more  important  in  the  schemes  which 
Austria  and  Germany  were  conceiving.  Possession  of  the 
provinces  gave  the  Dual  Monarchy  assured  control  of  a 
large  part  of  the  east  shore  of  the  Adriatic,  and  an  impos- 
ing position  in  the  Balkans,  while  possession  of  the  country 
was  necessary  for  the  Teutonic  scheme  of  controllmg  the 
way  down  to  Turkey  and  the  greater  domain  across  the 
straits.  Under  no  circumstances  would  either  Germany 
or  Austria  see  the  loss  of  the  provinces  threatened,  and  so 
Austria  acted  at  once.  October  3,  Austria-Hungary  cast 
aside  the  provision  of  the  Treaty  of  Berlin,  without  con- 
sulting the  other  parties  to  the  Treaty,  and  announced  that 
Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  were  annexed. 

A  dangerous  crisis  ensued.  Turkey,  most  directly  ag- 
grieved, strongly  protested,  but  could  do  nothing,  and 
after  a  while  accepted  pecuniary  compensation  and  ac- 
quiesced. Great  Britain  and  France,  who  had  signed  the 
Treaty  of  Berlin,  were  affronted,  and  they  protested.    To 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       407 

Russia,  also  a  si^matory,  and  much  more  greatly  interested 
because  of  her  position  and  ambition  in  the  Balkans,  the 
affront  was  far  greater  and  she  insisted  that  the  matter  be 
laid  before  a  European  congress.  ]\Iost  furious  of  all  was 
Servia,  the  neighboring  independent  South  Slavic  state. 
She  had  long  hoped  that  when  the  day  came  of  the  break- 
ing up  of  European  Turkey,  the  Bosnians  and  their  kins- 
men would  be  united  in  a  greater  Servian  kingdom,  like 
that  which  had  flourished  centuries  before,  in  the  days 
before  the  coming  of  the  Turk.  And  she  had  hoped  that 
possession  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  would  help  her 
toward  the  outlet  to  the  sea  without  which  she  could 
never  be  great.  If  the  provinces  now  were  finally  in- 
corporated into  Austria-Hungary,  the  dream  of  future 
Servian  greatness  would  never  be  realized.  Accordingly, 
while  Russia  was  prepared  to  oppose  the  action  as  strongly 
as  she  could,  Servia  was  resolved  to  fight  to  the  death, 
and  could  with  difficulty  be  restrained  from  attacking  her 
powerful  neighbor. 

Austria  refused  to  discuss  her  action  any  further.  She 
was  willing  that  a  European  congress  should  be  called,  but 
the  taking  of  Bosnia  and  Herzegovina  must  be  regarded  as 
a  fait  accompli.  Russia  resisted  firmly,  and  was  supported 
by  her  two  partners  in  the  Triple  Entente.  Servia,  be- 
lieving that  she  would  be  helped  by  Russia,  made  ready 
for  war.  With  grave  and  anxious  months  the  winter  of 
1908-9  passed  slowly.  Then  suddenly  the  matter  was 
ended  when  Germany  decisively  intervened.  She  was 
apparently  in  the  delicate  position  of  having  to  offend  one 
of  her  friends.  She  had  enormous  interests  in  Turkey, 
and  her  greatest  hope  for  the  future  lay  in  making  the 
Turks  friends  and  dependents.  Not  less  important  was 
the  alliance  with  the  Dual  Monarchy,  whose  position  she 
would  at  all  costs  maintain.  But  her  very  able  ambassa- 
dor in  Constantinople,  Von  Bieberstein,  v/ho  was  already 
busy   in   winning   the   allegiance   of   the   Young   Turks, 


Russia  and 
Servia  in  the 
crisis 


Germany 

compels 
Russia  to 
yield,  1909 


408 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


''Shining 
Armor" 


Imposing 
position  of 
the  German 
Empire, 
1909-11 


persuaded  them  that  it  was  best  to  accept  the  inevitable, 
and  so  Turkey  and  Austria  came  to  agreement.  Mean- 
while, Germany  gave  full  support  to  Austria  against  Rus- 
sia and  the  Entente.  German  troops  were  massed  in 
formidable  array  along  the  Russian  frontier,  so  that  after- 
ward the  kaiser  could  say  that  he  had  stood  forth  beside 
his  ally  "in  shining  armor."  A  messenger  was  sent  to  the 
tsar,  presumably  to  ask  whether  Austria's  action  was 
satisfactory.  Russia  was  in  no  condition  to  fight,  for 
she  had  recovered  little  as  yet  from  the  disasters  of  the 
war  with  Japan,  and  it  was  doubtful  whether  England, 
perhaps  France,  would  be  willing  to  fight  because  of  the 
Balkans  where  they  had  no  direct  interest.  So  Russia 
yielded  suddenly  and  completely.  At  the  end  of  March 
the  Russian  Government  declared  that  it  recognized  the 
annexation  as  a  fait  accompli.  A  few  days  later  Servia, 
with  bitterest  humiliation,  signed  a  document  declaring 
that  she  renounced  her  attitude  of  protest  against  the 
annexation,  and  would  "live  in  future  on  good,  neighborly 
terms"  with  Austria-Hungary. 

Thus  in  1909  Russia  had  been  humiliated  and  rebuffed 
as  France  had  been  in  1905.  In  the  east  as  in  the  west 
of  Europe,  when  Germany  spoke  with  hand  on  the  sword, 
German  word  was  law.  The  old,  splendid  successes  of 
Bismarck  were  being  revived  and  exceeded.  In  spite  of 
the  formation  of  the  Triple  Entente  the  colossal  power  of 
Germany  was  not  shaken,  and  she  stood  as  dominant  and 
terrifying  as  ever  before.  She  had  given  command  to 
France,  and  Great  Britain  had  not  been  able  to  save 
France  from  yielding.  She  had  spoken  to  Russia  in  be- 
half of  her  ally,  and  Russia  had  yielded  completely.  Austria 
was  now  the  principal  power  interested  in  the  Balkans  as 
Germany  was  in  Turkey;  and  Servia,  the  little  protege 
of  Russia,  had  been  abandoned  helpless,  and  forced  to 
promise  a  friendship  which  she  loathed.  What  was  the 
Triple  Entente  beside  the  Triple  Alliance?     And  as  if  to 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       400 


crown  the  success  slie  had  gained,  Germany  now  came 
to  another  separate  understanding  willi  tlie  Isar.  In 
November,  1910,  tlie  Russian  ruler  was  the  guest  of  the 
kaiser  at  Potsdam,  and  there  an  agreement  was  made  by 
which  Russia's  position  in  Persia  was  acknowledged,  and 
Russia  withdrew  opposition  to  the  Bagdad  Railway  which 
Germany  wished  to  complete.  So,  not  only  was  the 
Entente  shaken  when  Germany  spoke,  but  one  of  its  mem- 
bers seemed  to  be  drawing  away. 

This  crisis  had  been  brought  to  an  end  without  disaster, 
but  like  the  others  it  left  an  evil  train  behind  it,  ominous 
of  woes  still  to  come.  The  cynical  violation  of  the  Treaty 
of  Berlin  by  Austria-Hungary  was  fraught  with  conse- 
quences of  evil.  All  through  the  nineteenth  century,  with 
the  progress  toward  better  things,  there  had  been  effort 
to  have  the  sanctity  of  treaties  held  more  reverently. 
"Contracting  powers  can  rid  themselves  of  their  treaty 
engagements  only  by  an  understanding  with  their  co- 
signatories," said  the  Declaration  of  London  in  1871,  to 
which  Austria-Hungary  had  been  a  party.  But  among 
Germans  there  had  been  growing  up  of  late  the  doctrine 
that  treaties  need  not  be  kept  if  they  were  in  opposition 
to  the  good  of  the  State,  and  in  the  more  terrible  daj's  of 
1914  this  doctrine  was  to  be  reaffirmed  when  the  treaty 
concerning  the  neutralization  of  Belgium  was  violated  as 
a  mere  'scrap  of  paper."  The  result  of  Austria's  action 
in  1908  was  to  undermine  public  confidence  in  treaties  and 
international  engagements,  and  to  make  the  more  cau- 
tious men  believe  that  such  engagements  were  good  only 
while  maintained  by  force. 

This  was  the  last  great  diplomatic  triumph  that 
Germany  was  destined  to  win.  The  success  of  1908-9  was 
speedily  followed  by  two  setbacks  which  so  far  disturbed 
her  position  of  supremacy  in  Europe  that  she  was  willing 
at  last  to  make  one  more  effort  to  get  back  her  hegemony 
or  else  impose  her  will  by  force.     And,  as  will  be  seen,  it 


The  Pots- 
dam Accord, 
1910 


Interna- 
tional en- 
gagements 
weakened 


The  chang- 
ing current 
of  affairs 


410 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Increasing 
strength  of 
the  Triple 
Entente 


France  gains 
in  assurance 
and  strength 


Russia 
regaining 
her  strength 


was  such  an  attempt  that  led  straight  to  the  cataclysm 
of  the  Great  War. 

The  Entente  Cordiale  had  been  followed  by  humiliation 
for  France,  and  the  formation  of  the  Triple  Entente  had 
not  been  able  to  save  Russia  from  surrender  a  year  later 
on;  but  actually  the  opponents  of  Germany  and  the 
Triple  Alliance  were  coming  more  closely  together  and 
feeling  that  they  could  count  on  one  another  more  certainly 
for  support.  Especially  was  this  the  case  with  England 
and  France.  They  were  strengthening  their  forces,  and 
they  were,  apparently,  strengthening  year  by  year  their 
determination  not  always  to  yield  at  Germany's  behest. 
In  France  there  was  going  on  steadily  both  a  revival  of 
courage  and  assurance  and  a  great  rebirth  of  national 
feeling,  which  made  people  less  disposed  than  before  to 
crouch  before  the  Germany  which  had  conquered  them 
once.  In  Great  Britain  there  was  each  year  more  vivid 
apprehension  of  possible  danger  from  the  greatness  of  the 
German  Empire,  resolution  to  be  on  perpetual  guard, 
and  determination  under  no  circumstances  ever  again  to 
let  France  alone  confront  German  aggression  or  suffer  her 
to  be  crushed.  The  policy  of  Russia  was  more  obscure,  and 
depended,  apparently,  more  on  the  personal  character  of 
the  ruler,  who  was  known  to  be  partly  under  the  influence 
of  the  kaiser.  Yet,  it  was  evident  that  Russia's  principal 
ambitions  were  now  in  the  Balkans,  and  that  she  was  thus 
brought  again  into  direct  rivalry  with  the  Teutonic 
powers.  It  was  certain  that  she  was  rapidly  recovering 
the  naval  and  military  strength  that  had  been  lost  at 
Mukden  and  Tsushima.  It  was  very  evident  also  that 
the  policy  of  Italy  was  now  in  conflict  with  that  of 
Austria-Hungary,  at  the  same  time  that  Italy  had  renewed 
good  relations  with  France,  so  that  Italian  support  could 
no  longer  be  counted  on  for  Germany  and  Austria  in  any 
great  war.  All  these  factors  had  to  do  with  the  changes 
that  now  took  place. 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       411 


The  third  of  the  great  disputes  between  the  opposing 
combinations  came  in  1911,  and  again  it  had  to  do  with 
Morocco,  After  the  Conference  of  Algeciras,  France 
went  steadily  on  with  the  work  which  the  powers  had 
committed  to  her.  She  also  tried  to  come  to  an  under- 
standing with  Germany,  and  apparently  for  a  while  suc- 
ceeded in  so  doing.  Thus  encouraged  she  proceeded  to 
take  control  of  Morocco  as  far  as  she  could.  She  had  been 
permitted  to  occupy  certain  towns  and  maintain  order, 
and  under  pretext  of  policing  the  distracted  country  she 
pushed  an  armed  force  farther  and  farther  into  Morocco. 
To  Englishmen  and  Frenchmen  it  seemed,  doubtless, 
that  France  was  going  quietly  about  what  she  had  been 
so  brusquely  and  even  brutally  forbidden  to  do.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  must  have  seemed  to  Germans  that 
France  was  furtively  accomplishing  that  which  they  had 
tried  to  prevent  in  1905,  and  what  the  European  Congress 
of  the  following  year  had  refused  to  permit.  It  looked 
as  if  Morocco  was  about  to  become  a  French  possession, 
whatever  appearances  were  maintained,  and  Germany  re- 
solved that  this  should  not  happen  without  her  consent 
and  without  a  share  of  the  country  for  herself. 

Accordingly,  without  preliminary  warning,  July  1,  1911, 
it  was  announced  that  German  commercial  interests  in 
Morocco  were  being  threatened,  and  that  hence  a  German 
warship  had  been  sent  to  the  harbor  of  Agadir,  on  the 
Atlantic  coast  of  jMorocco,  to  protect  them.  But  it  was 
at  once  apparent  that  German  interests  were  insignificant 
in  the  district,  and  that  there  was  no  unusual  disorder.  It 
was  clearly  realized  that  Germany  had  intervened  this 
time  as  before,  and  at  once  there  resulted  a  crisis  which 
brought  the  nations  to  the  brink  of  war. 

The  moment  was  well  chosen,  as  was  the  moment  for 
the  Austrian  ultimatum  to  Servia  three  years  later.  France 
was  torn  by  socialist  and  industrial  agitation.  There  had 
just  been  a  great  strike  on  the  railroads,  broken  only 


The  second 
Morocco 
crisis,  1911 


Agadir 


Britain  and 

France 

embarrassed 


412 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Strike  of 
the  railway' 
workers  in 
France 


The  dip- 
lomatic 
struggle 


Feeling  in 
France  and 
in  Great 
Britain 


when  the  government  had  mobilized  the  trainmen  as 
soldiers  to  run  the  trains,  and  the  anger  at  this  was  so 
great  that  the  discontented  were  practising  acts  of  sabot- 
age, wrecking  and  destroying  wherever  they  could.  Min- 
istry was  following  ministry  in  quick  and  bewildering 
succession,  and  the  government  seemed  weak  and  un- 
stable. In  Great  Britain  also  there  was  widespread 
industrial  discontent,  and  there  had  just  been  disorders  in 
Liverpool  and  London  greater  than  people  could  remem- 
ber. Moreover,  the  country  was  in  the  very  midst  of  the 
great  constitutional  struggle  over  the  power  of  veto  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  the  people  were  divided  by  a  contest 
more  bitter  than  anything  since  the  passage  of  the  Reform 
Law  in  1867.  Russia  had  recently  entered  into  the  Pots- 
dam Agreement  with  Germany,  and  Russia  was  in  any 
event  little  interested  in  Morocco,  which  concerned  her 
directly  not  at  all. 

The  question  now  resolved  itself  into  another  great 
contest  between  the  Entente  and  the  Alliance,  or  more 
particularly  between  Germany  and  England  and  France. 
Between  the  French  and  the  German  governments  began 
a  series  of  "conversations,"  while  France  sought  to  learn 
how  far  Britain  would  give  her  support.  The  French 
Government,  which  had  itself  effectually  set  aside  the 
Algeciras  Agreement,  was  yet  able  to  maintain  that  Ger- 
many's action  distinctly  infringed  the  Agreement;  while 
Germany,  it  would  seem,  with  more  bluntness,  declared 
that  France  had  made  the  Agreement  of  no  force,  and  that 
in  the  new  order  of  things  which  had  arisen  Germany 
must  have  a  part  of  Morocco,  or  else,  as  she  hinted,  some 
compensation  elsewhere. 

In  France  the  German  demands  made  a  profound  im- 
pression on  a  people  always  sensitive,  and  then  in  the  midst 
of  a  revival  of  patriotic  and  national  feeling.  Germany's 
action  seemed  harsh  and  unprovoked.  Few  people 
wanted  war,  and  most  Frenchmen  dreaded  it;  but  while 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       4L3 


there  was  from  the  first  a  spirit  of  conciliation  and  no 
outburst  of  popular  wrath,  there  was  also  an  unexpected 
firmness  and  a  decision  not  to  bow  down  again.  In  the 
midst  of  the  negotiations  France  went  steadily  on  arming 
and  preparing  for  the  worst.  In  Britain  political  dissen- 
sions were  hushed  and  put  aside  for  the  moment,  as  all 
parties  stood  close  together.  There  was  great  popular 
sympathy  for  France  and  determination  to  support  her. 
It  was  clearly  realized  that  Germany,  already  dangerous 
to  Great  Britain  on  the  seas,  would  be  far  more  so  if  she 
got  possession  of  part  of  INIorocco,  at  the  northwest  comer 
of  Africa,  within  easy  striking  distance  of  the  Strait  of 
Gibraltar,  and  lying  right  on  the  flank  of  the  sea  route  to 
South  Africa,  constituting  thus  a  menace  both  to  Brit- 
ain's short-  and  long-water  route  to  the  East.  For  France 
the  presence  of  Germany  there  would  be  no  less  a  trouble 
and  danger.  It  would  always  be  possible  for  her  to  make 
easy  attack  on  the  French  Empire  in  northern  Africa,  and 
always  possible  for  her  to  stir  up  disaffection  among  the 
natives  of  Algeria  and  Tunisia. 

Accordingly  the  two  powers  stood  resolute  and  un- 
daunted. All  the  French  fleet  was  concentrated  in  the 
Mediterranean,  and  it  was  known  that  Britain's  great 
fleet  was  ready  in  the  Channel  and  in  the  North  Sea.  In 
the  negotiations  that  were  being  carried  on  between  Ber- 
lin and  Paris,  France,  brought  to  bay,  refused  to  let  Ger- 
many have  any  share  of  Morocco.  But  if  Germany  would 
agree  to  give  her  a  free  hand  there,  she  would  from  her 
other  possessions  grant  compensation  to  Germany  else- 
where. 

The  German  Government  was  soon  in  a  difficult  po- 
sition, much,  indeed,  like  that  in  which  it  was  during  the 
last  days  of  July,  1914.  Germany  had  intervened  with 
bold  determination  twice  before.  Each  time  her  weaker 
opponents  had  yielded,  and  there  had  been  no  trouble 
because   they   had   yielded.     But   now   she   had   spoken 


Spirit  of  de- 
termination 
in  France 


France  re- 
fuses to 
yield 


Difficulties 
of  Ger- 
many's 
position 


414 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
Empire  not 
ready 
for  war 


The  German 

Empire 

yields 


commandingly  again,  and  this  time  her  word  was  not  be- 
ing obeyed.  It  presently  became  apparent  that  to  en- 
force what  she  demanded  war  might  be  necessary,  and  it 
was  also  apparent  that  most  of  the  German  people  were 
not  sufficiently  interested  m  Morocco  to  give  enthusiastic 
support.  The  socialists  were  bitterly  opposed  to  such  a 
war;  most  of  the  people  did  not  feel  that  a  vital  interest 
of  the  nation  was  at  stake;  and  it  could  not  be  pretended, 
as  it  was  three  years  later,  that  Germany  was  being  at- 
tacked by  envious  foes  who  were  trying  to  effect  her  de- 
struction. None  the  less,  an  important  and  influential 
part  of  the  population,  all  those  who  had  been  strivmg 
for  the  creation  of  a  greater  German  Empire  and  for  the 
expansion  of  German  sea  power,  insisted  that  a  part  of 
Morocco  must  be  obtained,  or,  at  least,  certain  coaling 
stations.  But  France,  supported  by  Great  Britam, 
firmly  refused  to  consider  yielding  to  Germany  any  part  of 
the  country;  if,  however,  the  Imperial  Government  ac- 
knowledged her  absolute  political  supremacy  in  Morocco, 
so  that  it  would  not  in  the  future  be  called  in  question, 
then  she  would  cede  to  Germany  about  a  third  of  her 
Congo  territory.  From  this  offer  she  would  not  swerve. 
Therefore,  in  the  anxious  weeks  of  August  and  Septem- 
ber, 1911,  it  seemed  that  any  day  war  might  break  out. 
The  French  people  dreaded  the  prospect  of  such  a  war, 
for  they  realized,  as  they  did  so  clearly  in  1914,  that  this 
time  defeat  meant  the  definitive  loss  of  their  position  as  a 
Great  Power.  But,  encouraged  by  England,  they  stood 
watchful  and  firm.  They  were  in  a  position  far  differ- 
ent from  that  of  the  earlier  years  when  the  Kaiser  is  re- 
ported to  have  said:  "I  hold  France  in  the  hollow  of  my 
hand."  The  best  judges  believed  that  the  French  were 
superior  to  the  Germans  in  airplanes  and  field  artillery, 
and  there  could  be  no  doubt  that  the  sea  power  of  the 
Entente  was  overwhelmingly  superior  to  the  German. 
Brought  to  the  time  of  decision  the  German  Government 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       415 

hesitated  at  last.  It  is  said  that  the  host  advisers  were 
consulted  about  whether  the  present  opportunity  was 
favorable  for  a  war,  and  the  answers  were  against  it. 
Especially  did  the  financiers  oppose  a  conflict.  The 
French  had  been  conducting  what  they  called  a  "financial 
niol>ilization."  The  vast  and  e.\j)andnig  industry  of 
Germany  had  been  built  up  partly  on  borrowed  capital, 
nuich  of  it  supplied  by  the  French.  If  the  money  founda- 
tion of  this  structure  were  shaken,  the  whole  edifice  might 
tojjple  down  in  a  great  industrial  panic.  The  French 
were  silently  calling  in  their  loans,  and  a  colossal  panic 
seemed  imminent  with  widespread  economic  ruin.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  French  proposals  were  accepted;  there  was 
no  war;  and  the  crisis  ended. 

By  the  end  of  September  the  danger  was  passed,  and     The  Mo- 
early    in    November    an    agreement    was    signed.     Sub-     ^°'^^°^"f^' 

•^  .  ^  ■»  r  ^'"^^  settled 

stantially  France  established  a  protectorate  over  jVIorocco, 
guaranteeing  to  all  nations  equality  of  trade;  and  she 
ceded  to  Germany  part  of  her  Congo  territory.  The  ar- 
rangement was  not  completely  satisfactory,  since  French- 
men believed  that  Germany  had  been  bribed  to  permit 
what  she  had  no  right  to  interfere  in,  and  Germans  were 
bitterly  disappointed  that  they  had  obtained  no  part  of 
Morocco.  Germany  had,  it  is  true,  been  so  confident  of 
her  strength  that  she  had  defied  both  England  and  France, 
and  she  had  made  good  her  contention  that  no  important 
matter  could  be  settled  unless  she  was  consulted ;  but  she 
was  no  longer  able  to  carry  her  point,  and  if  she  had  hoped 
to  drive  England  and  France  apart  and  break  up  the 
Entente  Cordiale,  it  w^as  apparent  now  that  the  under- 
standing was  closer  than  ever  and  virtually  a  strong  alli- 
ance. 

One  of  the  principal  results  of  this  contest  was  increas-     German  bit- 
ing German  bitterness  toward  England.     Great  Britain 
had  supported  France  stoutly,  and  in  Germany  there  had 
been  widespread  indignation  at  what  was  termed  the  un- 


terness 
toward  Eng- 
land 


416 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Balkan 

crisis, 

1912-13 


Austria- 
Hungary 
opposes 
Servia 


warranted  interference  of  England.  "We  know  now  the 
enemy  who  loses  no  chance  to  bar  our  way."  This  bitter- 
ness resulted  largely  from  comprehension  that  British 
support  had  made  it  possible  for  France  to  give  Germany 
the  greatest  diplomatic  set-back  that  Germans  had  knowTi 
since  before  the  Franco-German  War.  On  all  sides  was 
expressed  the  determination  to  see  that,  next  time,  the 
Fatherland  would  be  so  prepared  that  there  would  be  no 
receding;  and  it  was  probable  that  if  another  crisis  found 
Germany  ready  she  would  not  again  endure  to  be  checked. 
But  the  next  crisis  did  not  arise  through  Germany's 
seeking,  though  it  soon  involved  Austria's  interests  and 
her  own.  It  came  from  the  Balkan  wars  of  1912  and 
1913,  and  had  to  do  with  Teutonic  influence  and  plans  in 
southeastern  Europe.  After  the  overwhelming  defeat  of 
Turkey  early  in  the  First  Balkan  War  representatives 
of  the  Great  Powers  assembled  in  London  to  discuss 
the  startling  new  problems  just  raised.  It  was  not  long 
before  dangerous  tension  developed.  Servia,  by  reason 
of  her  success,  had  not  only  conquered  territory  which  she 
greatly  desired,  but  she  had  now  the  chance  of  extending 
do\\Ti  through  Albania  and  getting  an  outlet  on  the 
Adriatic  Sea.  To  this  Austria-Hungary  was  altogether 
opposed.  Not  only  was  Servia  more  hostile  and  danger- 
ous to  her  than  any  other  Balkan  state,  so  that  she  was 
entirely  unwalling  for  Servia  to  become  greater  and  more 
independent,  but  a  strong  Servia  resting  on  the  sea 
would  really  block  her  hoped-for  extension  toward  the 
yEgean.  Therefore  she  declared,  in  effect,  that  Servia 
must  not  reach  to  the  sea  and  that  she  must  not  occupy 
Durazzo.  Servia  insisted  upon  getting  the  city,  and  in 
November  Austria  began  to  mobilize  her  troops.  Then 
Germany  declared  that  she  would  support  her  allies  if 
they  were  attacked.  Russia  began  to  mobihze  troops 
behind  the  screen  of  her  Polish  fortresses,  and  France 
announced  that  she  would  stand  by  her  ally  if  she  were 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       117 


needed.  Italy,  while  oi){)ose(l  to  Servia  appearing'  on  the 
Adriatic,  was  as  much  opposed  to  further  extension  of 
Austrian  power  down  the  eastern  coast  of  that  sea.  In 
Great  Britain  puhlic  oj)inion,  so  far  as  it  was  interested, 
was  in  favor  of  letting  the  small  Balkan  States  keej)  the 
conquests  they  had  won  from  the  Turk,  even  though  at 
the  beginning  the  Great  Powers  had  announced  that  these 
states  would  not  be  allowed  to  make  conquests. 

Servia  yielded  and  withdrew  her  troops,  and  in  the 
treaty  of  peace  that  followed  an  independent  Albania 
was  constituted,  as  Austria  wished.  The  Montenegrins, 
however,  continued  to  besiege  Scutari,  in  northern  Al- 
bania, and  after  a  long  investment,  captured  the  for- 
tress. Before  the  fall  of  the  city  the  powers  had  notified 
Montenegro  that  Scutari  was  to  belong  to  Albania,  and 
then  they  blockaded  the  one  little  harbor  which  Monte- 
negro possessed.  When  Scutari  fell,  Austria-Hungary  de- 
manded that  it  be  given  up  at  once,  and  went  forward  with 
the  mobilization  of  troops.  Again  Russia  made  ready  to 
support  her  Slavic  kinsmen  as  when  the  Servians  had  been 
threatened  some  months  before  over  Durazzo.  Once 
more  the  crisis  was  passed  when  Montenegro  yielded  to 
the  pressure  of  the  powers  and  abandoned  the  city  which 
she  had  just  taken  at  such  great  cost. 

The  result  of  the  Second  Balkan  War,  even  more  than 
that  of  the  First,  produced  a  profound  alteration  in  the 
balance  of  power  and  politics  in  Europe.  Early  in  1912, 
after  long  struggle  between  the  Teutonic  powers  and  Rus- 
sia for  predominating  influence  in  the  Balkans,  the  result 
then  was  that  Servia,  small  and  unimportant,  along  with 
Montenegro,  of  little  consequence,  were  friendly  to  Russia 
and  to  some  extent  dependent  on  her,  while  Greece,  also 
unimportant,  was  bound  by  many  ties  to  France.  On  the 
other  hand,  Rumania,  the  strongest  and  most  progressiv^e 
of  the  Balkan  states,  was  allied  by  secret  agreement  with 
the  Central  Powers,  and  thus  attached  to  the  Triple  Alli- 


Servia  and 
Montenegro 
yield  to 
Austria- 
Hungary 


The  new 
situation  in 
the  Balkans, 
1913 


418 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Diminished 
power  of  the 
Triple 
Alliance 


Austria  de- 
sires to  re- 
cover her 
influence    in 
the  Balkans, 
1913 


German 
preparations 
not  com- 
plete 


ance;  Bulgaria,  strong  and  successful,  was  very  friendly 
to  the  Dual  Monarchy,  and  Turkey,  still  believed  to  be 
more  powerful  than  any  of  her  neighbors,  was  bound  by 
close  ties  to  the  German  Empire.  But  after  the  end  of 
the  Second  Balkan  War  not  only  was  the  strength  of 
Turkey  as  a  European  power  so  weakened  that  she  counted 
for  little  more  than  possessor  of  the  incomparable  site  of ' 
Constantinople  and  territories  in  Asia,  but  Servia,  the 
bitter  enemy  of  Austria,  had  come  out  of  both  wars  with 
increased  power  and  territory  and  greatly  increased 
prestige,  and  Rumania,  former  friend  of  the  Central 
Powers,  was  no  longer  so  closely  bound  to  them,  and  had, 
indeed,  acted  contrary  to  their  wishes  against  their  friend. 

Altogether,  the  position  of  Germany  and  Austria- 
Hungary  was  less  good  with  respect  to  the  Balkans  than 
before.  It  seemed  to  both  of  them,  apparently,  that  their 
position  was  endangered  and  impaired.  Austria  greatly 
desired  to  settle  at  once  her  account  with  Servia,  and 
reduce  her  permanently  to  a  position  in  which  she  could 
never  again  be  a  source  of  apprehension.  It  was  learned 
afterward  that  in  August,  1913,  Austria-Hungary  wished 
to  proceed  against  Servia  at  once,  and  tried  to  get  her 
partners  in  the  Triple  Alliance  to  join  her.  But  the  Italian 
Government,  describing  it  as  a  "most  perilous  adventure," 
refused  to  give  sanction,  and  the  matter  was  dropped  until 
the  next  year.  What  action  Germany  then  took  is  not 
certain,  though  most  probably  she  also  dissuaded  her  ally. 
During  the  conference  of  the  powers  in  London,  she  had 
acted  along  with  Great  Britain  in  trying  to  settle  peace- 
ably the  matters  at  issue. 

Had  she  joined  Great  Britain  in  the  next  year  as  cor- 
dially, it  is  probable  that  the  Great  War  would  have  been 
avoided.  But  whereas  in  1914  she  was  ready  for  the 
great  decision,  it  is  known  now  that  in  1913  she  did  not  con- 
sider her  preparations  complete.  The  changes  in  the  Bal- 
kans seemed  to  diminish  her  military  superiority,  and  in 


ALLIANCE    AND    ENTENTES       410 

19L3  many  Germans  declared  that  the  country  could  be  safe 
from  the  ^'rowing  menace  of  Russia  and  Pan-Slavism  only 
if  great  sacrifices  were  made  and  the  army  largely  increased. 
Accordingly,  huge  and  extraordinary  sums  of  money  were 
voted  for  greater  armaments,  and  the  army  was  increased 
to  870,000  men.  Immediately  thereupon  the  French,  feel- 
ing the  greater  danger  from  (lermany,  increased  tlieir 
army  also.  They  could  not  with  their  stationary  popu- 
lation simply  expand  their  standing  army  as  the  Germans 
were  doing,  but  by  keeping  the  troops  with  the  colors  for 
three  years  instead  of  for  two  they  made  a  substantial  in- 
crease. It  was  recognized  that  this  was  literally  the  last 
effort  of  France  in  the  race. 

So  many  dangerous  periods  had  now  been  safely  passed 
that  pacifists  and  well-meaning  people  began  to  believe 
that  a  great  war  never  would  come.  But  it  had  almost  come 
in  1911,  and  more  nearly  in  1913.  Both  times  the  great 
struggle  was  avoided,  it  would  now  seem,  because  Germany 
was  not  yet  ready.  In  another  year  she  would  be  pre- 
pared. Then  another  crisis  would  come,  again  about 
Servia  and  the  Balkans,  and  that  time  the  utmost  efforts 
of  those  who  wished  peace  would  not  be  sufficient  to  keep 
It. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  Triple  Entente:  R.  B.  Mowat,  Select  Treaties  and  Docu- 
ments (ed.  1916),  contains  the  texts  of  the  Entente  Cordialc,  public 
and  secret  parts,  and  of  the  Anglo-Russian  Agreement;  Sir 
Thomas  Barclay,  Thirty  Years'  Anglo-French  Reminiscences 
(1914);  L.  J.  Jaray,  La  Politique  Franco- Anglaise  et  V Arbitrage 
Internatif)nale  (1904);  E.  Lemonon,  UEnrope  et  la  Politique 
Britannique,  1882-1910  (1910);  R.  Millet,  Notre  Politique 
Exterieure  de  1898-1905  (1905),  hostile  to  Delcasse;  Gilbert 
Murray,  The  Foreign  Policy  of  Sir  Edward  Grey  (1915),  de- 
fends; G.  H.  Perris,  Our  Foreign  Policy  and  Sir  Edward  Grey's 
Failure  (1912)  opposed  to  the  ententes;  A.  Tardieu,  Questions 
Diplomatique s  de  VAnnee  1904  (1905). 

Relations    with    Russia:    The    Willy-Nicky    Correspondence, 


Alleged 
menace 
of  Pan- 
Slavism 


The  lull  pre- 
ceding the 
storm 


420  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

edited  by  Herman  Bernstein  (1918),  to  be  supplemented  by 
S.  B.  Fay,  "The  Kaiser's  Secret  Negotiations  with  the  Czar, 
190-1-5,"  American  Historical  Review,  October,  1918;  N.  F. 
Grant,  editor,  TJie  Kai.sers  Letters  to  the  Tsar  (1920). 

The  conflict  over  Morocco:  P.  Albin,  Le  '"Coup"  d'Agadir 
(1912);  H.  Closs,  West-Marokko  Deutsch  (1911);  G.  Diercks, 
Die  Marokkofrage  und  die  Konferenz  von  Algeciras  (1906);  L. 
Maurice,  La  Politique  Marocaine  de  V Allemagne  (1916);  E. 
Morel,  Morocco  in  Diplomacy  (1912),  well  documented,  but 
strongly  prejudiced  against  France  and  the  Anglo-French  policy, 
reissued  as  Ten  Years  of  Secret  Diplomacy  (1915);  A.  Tardieu, 
La  Conference  d' Algeciras  (ed.  1917),  best  on  subject,  Le  Mys- 
tere  d\4gadir  (1912),  best  account  of;  A.  Wirth,  Die  Entschei- 
dung  Uber  Marokko  (1911). 


^Crockei 
Land 

OCEAN 


.Washington  l.(»r.) 

Phoen.«  Is.       ■■'•"'IS  I- («<■.) 

•■■  (B')  .Slarbuck  I.  (Br.) 

Tokel^u  Of,.    .      Dudoja  I    <*'  ) 

unroniis,'"'   •,e,°"„\]„,     :..  Marquesas  1 

Dangc  I  Pol.h.^o,   .•C.-olin«l'i»M 

'Nassju  I       .      I  IB,  ]         M«"ihil"  lsl».  1 
U/1     ■•.■••      -Suwirow  I  ljr.)>;' 

>amoa  or   cq^^^xv  Is  ,;,•.  *  ^^  .      Tuamctu  or 
l^?.'if1'.%.'V         ■•■  H.^'e';;,  V  ••>  -..Lo.  Archipelago 
;^Tonga  or     .  •    Cook  fs^  ■<■  ':  ■ 

Friendly  Is  'I'jSV'IS'-)    ■^jf"",'' iV '•  .Dude  l.(»r.) 

(»'■)  „         ,  ,.    ,"   !»'<     '     PitMirn  l.(«r.)  .SalayGomej 

Oparol.(«r.).  ^,^,^,, 


•   Chatham  U 


Dougherty  t.  , 


^?^  («' )  British  Empire 


'South  Orkneys 
(«r.) 


24.    THE  BRIT; 


EMPIRE  IN  1914 


CHAPTER    XVI 
THE   CAUSES   OF   THE   GREAT   WAR 

Gelcgentlich  dor  Uborgahe  dor  vorstehonflon  Note  wollon  Euor 
Hocliwolilgt'l)oren  inUiidlich  liinziifiigen,  dass  Sie  hcauftragt  seien 
— falls  IhiR'H  iiiclit  inzwisclu'ii  ciiu*  vorlR'haltlijSf  zustiriimendc 
Antwort  der  konigliclu'ii  Regicniiig  zngokoinnicn  st-iii  solltc — nach 
Ablauf  dor  in  dor  Note  vorgesehenen,  voin  Tage  und  von  der 
Stunde  Hirer  Mitteilung  an  zu  reehnenden  48  stiindigen  Frist,  mil 
dem  Personale  der  k.  u.  k.  Gesandsehaft  Belgrad  zu  verlassen. 
Instruetion  of  Count  Beuchtold  to  Baron  von  Giesl,  about 
presenting  the  Austrian  Note  at  Belgrade,  July  2^2,  1914. 

Such  had  been  tlie  development  of  the  politics  of 
Europe.  Ominous  and  terrible  things  loomed  up  ever 
more  striking,  and  there  were  not  wanting  those  who 
each  year  predicted  a  great  war  inevitable  in  the  future. 
Yet,  this  seemed  such  a  travesty  upon  civilization  and  the 
progress  of  mankind  that  many  a  zealous  and  earnest 
person  contended  in  these  later  years  that  no  great  war 
could  again  take  place,  that  war  never  paid,  and  that  the 
dreadful  losses  certain  to  come  would  deter  the  principal 
nations  from  fighting.  It  was  beheved  that  arbitration 
would  be  used  more  and  more  in  the  future,  that  the 
Hague  Tribunal,  which  had  been  erected  in  1899,  at  the 
suggestion  of  the  tsar,  and  to  which  shortly  after  the 
United  States  had  brought  the  first  case,  would  be  able 
peaceably  to  settle  disputes.  Furthermore,  it  was  often 
said  that  the  whole  tendency  of  politics  recently  had  been 
to  make  governments  more  and  more  democratic  and  bring 
them  more  thoroughly  under  the  control  of  the  represen- 
tatives of  the  people;  that  the  commonalty  in  all  countries 
were  really  bound  together  by  ties  recognized  ever  more 
clearly;  that  each  year  they  better  imderstood  how  wars 

421 


Possibility 
of  a  great 
war 


Democracy 
and  peace 


422 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Alleged 
class  inter- 
est and  wars 


Immediate 
causes 


General  and 

underlying 

causes 


were  made  by  the  upper  classes  in  their  own  selfish  class 
interests,  that  they  were  fought  by  the  common  people 
upon  whom  fell  all  the  suffering  and  loss,  but  who  got 
none  of  the  benefits  of  victory;  and  that,  therefore,  the 
mass  of  the  people,  now  that  they  had  power  in  governing 
themselves,  would  not  permit  any  more  wars  or  give  them 
support.  Finally,  it  was  believed  by  many  that  commerce 
and  finance  now  bound  together  the  nations  so  closely 
that  powerful  economic  forces  were  making  war  impossible. 
There  was  much  truth  in  all  of  these  contentions,  and 
perhaps  had  mankind  been  more  fortunate  and  wiser,  no 
great  war  need  have  come.  But  as  one  looks  back  now 
and  considers  things  as  they  were,  not  as  men  hoped  they 
were,  it  is  evident  that  there  were  certain  great  causes  tend- 
ing almost  irresistibly  to  the  awful  disaster  which  came. 

The  immediate  causes  of  the  Great  War  of  1914  were 
the  assassination  of  the  Archduke  Franz  Ferdinand  and 
the  note  that  Austria-Hungary  addressed  to  Servia 
thereupon.  But  great  and  larger  causes  had  long  been 
potently  working. 

The  great  nations  of  Europe  were  by  1914  divided  into 
two  great  hostile  combinations,  the  Triple  Alliance  and 
the  Triple  Entente,  armed  to  the  teeth  and  constantly 
watching  each  other.  Militarism  had  developed  until 
in  Europe  there  was  the  vastest  accumulation  of  arms, 
munitions,  and  war  supplies  which  had  ever  been  got  to- 
gether, the  largest  number  of  soldiers  that  had  ever  been 
trained  for  war,  the  greatest  amount  of  military  science 
and  skill,  and  not  a  little  desire  to  use  in  war  what  had  been 
prepared  for  war.  Certain  consequences  of  the  mere 
geographical  shape,  arrangement,  and  division  of  Europe 
made  some  nations  hostile  to  others.  The  trend  of  events 
seemed  to  favor  some  nations  of  Europe  more  than 
the  others,  which  caused  military  statesmen  to  believe 
that  if  their  nations  did  not  make  war  now  they  could 
have  little  chance  in  the  future.     Differences  in  birth-rate 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   423 

and  growth  of  population  made  disparity,  arrogance,  and      Great  rival- 
fear.     The  relations  between  Germany  and  England,  and      "^^  ^^ 

.  .  differences 

the  rivalry  between  Teutons  and  Slavs,  especially  with 
respect  to  the  Balkans,  had  for  some  years  threatened  a 
conflict.  Above  all,  the  character,  tiie  amljitions,  the 
ideals,  the  purposes  of  the  German  people  made  war  seem 
desirable  to  them,  a  good  thing  not  to  be  shunned.  Most 
of  these  causes  affected  and  influenced  all  of  the  European 
powers,  and  for  that  reason  in  theearly  years  of  the  struggle 
it  seemed  to  many  people  in  the  United  States  that  here 
was  merely  another  contest  brought  about  by  rivalries  and 
unwholesome  ambitions,  with  one  side  no  better  than  the 
other.  Presently,  however,  it  was  seen  that  German 
designs  had  influenced  and  directed  all  the  other  factors; 
and  in  the  end  the  opinion  prevailed  that  blame  should 
be  placed  upon  the  Grrnum  people  and  their  leaders. 

The  growth  of  the  great  opposing  combinations  has  al-     Triple 
ready  been  traced.     By  1914  the  German  Empire,  Austria-     against 
Hungary,  and  Italy  still  composed  the  Triple  Alliance.    For     Triple 
some  time  Italy  had  been  attached  to  it  principally  through     Alliance 
fear  of  what  might  happen  if  she  left  it,  and  her  attitude 
in  any  great  conflict  was  a  matter  of  conjecture;  but 
Rumania   had    long   been   secretly    allied    with   Austria- 
Hungary,  and  more  recently  Turkey  had  been  so  closely 
attached  to  Germany's  interest  that  it  seemed  very  prob- 
able that  any  loss  through  Italy  would  be  made  good  by 
her.     On  the  other  side  were  Great  Britain,  Russia,  and 
France,  held  together  more  loosely,  and  held  together 
principally  through  dread  of  the  mighty  and  mcreasing 
greatness  of  the  German  Empire,  with  Russia  sometimes 
drawn  away  for  the  moment  by  the  influence  of  the  kaiser 
upon  the  tsar.     AMiatever  might  be  true  of  Italy  and  to 
a  less  extent  of  Russia,  the  two  Teutonic  powers  on  the 
one  side,  and  Great  Britain  and  France  on  the  other,  con- 
stantly drew  closer  together,  and  constantly  watched  their 
opponents  with  increasing  suspicion  and  alarm.     In  both 


424 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Militarism 


Develop- 
ment of  the 
Prussian 

army 


groups,  and  especially  in  England  and  France,  many  peo- 
ple bore  their  opponents  no  hostility  and  hoped  that  war 
never  would  come;  but  on  both  sides  were  those  who 
constantly  watched  for  the  favorable  moment  to  better 
their  position,  and  constantly  worked  to  oppose  their 
opponents.  Several  dangerous  situations  had  arisen,  and 
always  the  two  combinations  seemed  to  drift  into  deeper 
enmity  and  graver  danger  of  war. 

These  great  combinations  had  resulted  not  only  from 
political  developments,  but  partly  from  the  growth  and 
preparation  of  military  power.  In  the  nineteenth  century 
there  had  been  in  Europe  such  a  development  of  armies 
and  military  preparations  as  had  never  been  seen  before. 
In  former  times  there  had  been  great  military  states, 
Assyria,  Sparta,  Rome,  overawing  all  their  neighbors;  but 
now  almost  every  man  in  most  of  the  great  states  of 
Europe  had  been  trained  as  a  soldier  and  was  ready  for 
the  summons  to  come. 

The  wars  of  the  eighteenth  century  were  carried  on  in 
Europe  by  professional  soldiers,  paid  and  supported  by 
the  governments,  who  kept  them  as  standing  armies  in  per- 
manent military  establishments.  Such  armies  were  small 
as  compared  with  the  population  of  the  countries  that 
maintained  them.  Louis  XIV  terrified  all  Europe  when 
he  assembled  400,000  soldiers  at  a  time  when  the  popula- 
tion of  France  was  10,000,000.  But  during  the  nineteenth 
century  these  small  armies  of  professional  hired  soldiers 
were  given  over.  In  1813  a  law  passed  in  Prussia  provided 
that  a  certain  number  of  the  young  men  of  the  nation 
should  be  trained  as  soldiers  for  a  short  period,  after  which 
like  numbers  should  be  trained  in  succession  for  the  same 
short  period,  so  that  after  a  while  a  large  number  of  all 
the  young  men  should  have  been  trained  as  soldiers,  and 
in  time  of  need  could  be  called  out  for  active  service.  This 
system  was  extended  and  perfected  in  Prussia  until  after  a 
time  a  large  portion  of  all  Prussia's  men  had  had  military 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   425 


training.  It  was  because  of  this  tliat  Prussia  so  easily 
won  her  great  triumphs  over  Austria  and  France.  She 
had  by  far  the  largest  number  of  well-trained  soldiers  of 
any  state  in  the  world.  Enormous  advantage  came  from 
this,  because  a  large  army  could  not  be  created  quickly. 
War  was  becoming  so  elaborate  and  complicated  that  it 
was  nearly  hopeless  for  men  without  military  training  or 
organization  to  stand  against  an  army  well  prei)ared. 

So  great  and  so  obvious  was  the  advantage  of  Prussia, 
that  in  time  all  the  neighbors  of  the  Gennan  Phnpire 
adopted  this  system:  France,  Austria-Hungary,  Italy,  and 
Russia.  The  extent  to  which  the  system  of  "universal" 
military  service  was  adopted  by  each  one  depended  upon 
the  size  of  the  population  and  the  financial  ability  of  the 
nation  to  support  gigantic  military  forces.  Russia  did  not 
find  it  necessary'  to  take  all  of  her  men,  nor  did  the  German 
Empire,  but  France,  with  nmch  smaller  population,  and 
living  directly  by  Germany,  enrolled  all  her  men  physi- 
cally fit,  and  was  by  1014  the  classic  example  of  the  sys- 
tem. There  all  the  young  men,  not  deformed  or  too  weak, 
when  they  arrived  at  the  age  established  by  law,  went  to 
the  training  camps  for  three  years,  and  after  their  period 
of  training  entered  the  reserve.  In  1914  the  number  of 
soldiers  in  the  "standing  army"  of  Germany  was  870,000, 
while  4,000,000  more  trained  soldiers  could,  if  necessary, 
be  called;  in  France  670,000  were  in  the  camps,  and  it  was 
thought  that  3,000,000  could  follow.  By  this  time  the 
soldiers  of  the  Continental  armies  numbered  millions,  with 
millions  more  in  reserve.  There  had  never  been  anything 
like  it  before,  and  it  was  believed  that  another  war  would 
either  be  decided  immediately  in  favor  of  that  nation  which 
could  suddenly  bring  greatest  forces  to  bear,  or  else  all  the 
contestants  would  soon  be  exhausted  as  a  result  of  the 
stupendous  cost. 

Nor  was  this  all.  With  these  vast  military  establish- 
ments went  the  preparation  of  war-supplies  in  incredible 


Growth  of 
armies  in 
Europe 


Great 

standing 

armies 


426 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Military 
equipment, 
prepara- 
tions, and 
spirit 


The  Hague 
Peace  Con- 
ferences 


quantities.  Never  before  in  the  history  of  the  world  had 
there  been  so  enormous  an  accumulation  of  rifles,  cannon, 
machine  guns,  explosives,  and  death-dealing  instruments 
of  all  kinds.  The  best  brains  and  the  greatest  ingenuity 
in  some  of  these  countries  went  into  the  devising  of  more 
and  more  dreadful  instruments  of  destruction.  There 
was  feverish  activity  and  the  most  reckless  expenditure 
to  keep  up  in  the  race.  Powerful  weapons  soon  became 
obsolete  and  were  replaced  with  others  more  terrible.  To 
lag  in  the  race  might  some  time  mean  destruction  by  a 
more  active  rival.  Preparations  for  the  future  were 
constantly  made.  Elaborate  arrangements  were  prepared 
for  sudden  attack,  and  complete  plans  of  campaign. 
Spies  were  sent  out  in  time  of  peace,  to  collect  infor- 
mation or  disarrange  plans.  Railway  systems  were 
constructed  for  quickly  moving  troops,  and  "strategic 
railways"  appeared,  as  along  the  Belgian  frontier  of  Ger- 
many, where  there  were  few  passengers  and  little  freight 
to  be  moved.  And  still  more  terrible,  but  as  a  natural 
consequence,  powerful  men  who  gave  their  careers  to 
military  service  thought  about  military  effectiveness  so 
much  and  tried  so  hard  to  perfect  their  armies,  that  they 
came  to  think  of  war  as  a  good  thing,  and  to  hope  that 
there  might  some  day  be  a  chance  to  use  the  weapons  so 
well  prepared.  In  all  of  these  things  Germany  took  the 
lead  and  kept  far  ahead.  When  statesmen  of  other 
countries  tried  to  bring  about  reduction  of  armament,  and 
arrange  plans  for  settling  national  disputes  by  peaceable 
means,  Germany  always  opposed  or  refused. 

Some  efforts  were  made  to  abate  this  activity,  and 
there  were  not  a  few  who  dreamed  of  bringing  war  to  an 
end.  In  1898  Tsar  Nicholas  II  invited  the  nations  to 
consider  the  project  of  disarming.  As  he  truly  declared, 
increasing  armaments  and  the  expenses  entailed  threatened 
to  destroy  European  civilization.  In  the  next  year  what 
was  known  as  the  First  Peace  Conference  assembled  at 


CAUSES    OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      427 


The  Hague.  The  German  representative  declared  that 
in  his  country  the  army  was  no  burden;  and  it  was  not 
possible  to  agree  upon  any  scheme  of  reduction;  but  a 
permanent  court  of  arbitration  known  as  the  Hague 
Tribunal,  was  established,  to  deal,  at  the  request  of 
powers  concerned,  with  dili'erences  which  they  had  been 
unable  to  settle  by  diplomatic  negotiation.  In  1907  a 
second  Peace  Conference  met  at  The  Hague.  There 
was  a  larger  attendance,  and  stronger  efforts  were  now 
made  to  substitute  peaceable  arbitration  for  war,  and  so 
make  possible  the  reduction  of  armaments.  Again  there 
was  no  success,  and  it  was  afterward  stated  that  from 
Germany  came  the  most  effective  opposition.  A  body  of 
conventions  was  drawn  up  to  regulate  the  conduct  of  war 
and  forbid  certain  harsh  methods  and  divers  dreaded 
devices,  like  poisonous  gases.  These  conventions  were 
adopted,  but  again  Germany  made  no  actual  change  in 
the  stem  and  terrible  regulations  contained  in  her  Kriegs- 
branch  im  Landkriege  (usages  in  war),  which  had  been 
issued  five  years  before.  The  Hague  Conferences  ac- 
complished little,  but  they  are  the  principal  monument 
to  the  Russian  ruler  who  afterward  perished  so  miserably 
as  a  result  of  war.  And  they  were  afterward  seen  to  have 
been  preliminary  steps  toward  the  forming  of  a  league  of 
nations  to  abolish  all  war. 

Because  of  mere  geographical  situation  and  the  arrange- 
ment of  outlets  and  frontiers  some  of  the  nations  of 
Europe  were  at  a  disadvantage  as  compared  with  the 
others.  They  earnestly  desired  to  get  things  that  they 
lacked,  which  could  only  be  got  by  taking  them  away  from 
rivals.  Some  countries  were  closed  in  from  the  sea  by 
others,  who  could,  if  they  should  so  wish,  deny  them  outlet 
and  strangle  their  economic  life.  Some  nations  had  vast 
expanse  of  territory  in  which  to  increase  their  population 
and  make  themselves  greater  in  the  future.  Others  had 
restricted  area  and  far  less  chance  for  any  growth. 


Fruitless 
efforts  to 
abolish  war 


Geo- 
graphical 
factors 


458 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Russia, 
Austria- 
Hungary 


The  Adri- 
atic, the 
Baltic,  the 
Mediter- 
ranean 


Russia  had  immense  territory,  wanting  good  outlet. 
To  the  north  she  had  ports  in  the  Arctic  region,  which 
were  far  out  of  the  way  and  most  of  them  closed  by  ice 
during  much  of  the  year.  Far  to  the  east  she  had  a  good 
outlet  at  Vladivostok,  which  was  likewise  closed  during 
winter,  and  also  at  the  mercy  of  Japan.  In  the  west  she 
had  ports  on  the  Baltic  Sea,  but  they  were  not  only  used 
with  difficulty  during  some  months  in  the  winter,  but  the 
German  Empire  could  stop  all  Baltic  trade  if  ever  she 
wished.  In  the  south  there  were  excellent  ports  on  the 
Black  Sea,  and  to  this  sea  came  most  of  Russia's  com- 
merce, since  most  of  the  great  Russian  rivers  emptied 
there;  but  the  only  exit  from  the  Black  Sea  was  through 
the  Bosporus  and  the  Dardanelles,  narrow  straits  con- 
trolled absolutely  by  the  Turks  at  Constantinople.  It  had 
been  the  age-long  aspiration  of  Russians  to  get  a  good 
warm-water  outlet  and  it  had  long  been  their  passionate 
desire  to  win  Constantinople,  from  which  had  come  their 
religion  and  civilization,  and  which  seemed  to  them  a  holy 
city.  But  if  Russia  succeeded  in  this,  then  some  of  the 
greatest  ambitions  of  Germany  might  come  to  nothing, 
and  Austria-Hungary  would  be  largely  in  Russia's  power. 
Not  only  did  Austria-Hungary  desire  to  expand  south 
through  the  Balkans,  but  her  great  river,  the  Danube, 
emptied  into  the  Black  Sea,  and  much  of  her  commerce 
went  out  past  Constantinople.  That  is  to  say,  if  Russia 
succeeded  in  her  ambition,  then  Austria-Hungary  could 
be  largely  closed  in  and  at  Russia's  mercy,  while  if  Aus- 
tria got  what  she  desired,  then  Russia  could  be  at  her 
mercy  in  like  manner. 

There  were  many  circumstances  similar.  Austria's 
other  outlet  was  into  the  Adriatic,  at  Trieste  and  Fiume, 
but  the  end  of  the  Adriatic  was  getting  entirely  under 
Italy's  control.  Germany,  who  could  close  in  Russia 
on  the  Baltic,  found  her  great  trade  routes  in  the  North 
Sea  and  through  the  English  Channel  at  the  mercy  of 


CAUSES    OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      429 


Great  Britain  who  could  shut  llicrn  off  if  she  wislicd. 
And  all  the  nations  with  ports  on  the  ^lediterranean,  the 
most  important  sea  and  the  greatest  water  short-line  in 
the  world,  found  the  Mediterranean  held  at  both  ends, 
at  Suez  and  Gibraltar,  by  (Jreat  Britain.  It  was  not 
that  these  outlets  were  closed  and  nations  strangled  or 
made  economically  dependent,  but  the  fact  that  in  some 
great  struggle  they  could  be.  Statesmen  thought  of  the 
future,  and  were  filled  with  distrust.  In  time  of  peace 
all  the  seas  controlled  by  Britain  were  used  by  all  the 
nations  as  much  as  they  wished,  but  during  the  Great 
War  Britain's  command  of  the  sea  at  last  brought  Ger- 
many to  her  knees,  just  as  already  Russia  had  been 
destroyed  partly  because  she  had  from  the  first  been 
closed  in  by  the  German  Empire  and  Turkey.  Indeed, 
in  1911-12,  during  the  Turco-Italian  War,  in  which  Russia 
had  no  part,  Russia's  grain  fleet  was  completely  stopped 
through  the  closing  of  the  straits  by  Turkey. 

Just  as  great  to  some  seemed  the  disadvantage  of  not 
having  room  for  expansion.  The  English-speaking  peo- 
ples, the  Russians,  Chinese,  and  Japanese,  perhaps  some  of 
the  South  American  peoples,  had  room  in  which  to  grow 
and  increase  their  numbers.  Even  France,  whose  popula- 
tion was  stationary,  had  a  large  colonial  empire.  But 
Germany's  territory  was  small,  and  she  had  no  good 
colonies  or  thinly  peopled  districts  m  which  might  grow 
up  a  Germany  still  greater.  Her  population  was  rapidly 
increasing,  and  some  looked  forward  to  the  time  when 
there  would  be  200,000,000  Germans  in  the  Empire.  Then 
France  would  be  at  a  hopeless  disadvantage.  But  when 
that  time  came,  it  seemed  probable  that  the  population 
of  Russia  might  be  1,000,000,000,  and  then  what  chance 
would  Germany  have  against  her.'^  Nor  could  this  dis- 
parity be  avoided,  for  Russia  had  immense  territories  only 
thinly  peopled,  able  to  support  many  more,  while  beyond 
a  certain  number  it  did  not  seem  possible  that  Germany 


Possible 
economic 
strangula- 
tion 


Room  for 
growth  of 
population 


430 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Birth-rate 
and  growth 
of  population 


Birth-rate 
and 

standard 
of  living 


could  support  more  in  the  limited  area  which  she  possessed. 
Later  on,  accordingly,  the  destiny  of  the  world  would  be 
in  the  hands  of  great  contestants,  like  Russia,  the  British 
Empire,  the  United  States,  perhaps  Japan,  with  Germany 
relatively  a  minor  power  like  France — unless,  before  this 
evil  day  came,  Germany  struck  and  took  from  others  the 
territory  which  they  had  and  which  she  needed  so  badly. 

Connected  with  this  were  differences  in  birth-rate  and 
increase  in  population.  In  some  countries  the  number  of 
people  was  increasing  more  rapidly  than  in  others,  and, 
other  things  being  equal',  superior  numbers  would  be  sure 
to  give  greater  military  strength  and  power.  It  was 
largely  because  of  this  that  France  had  lost  the  position 
of  primacy  she  had  once  held  in  the  affairs  of  Europe. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century  her  population 
was  27,000,000;  in  1914  it  was  a  little  less  than  40,000,000. 
In  the  early  part  of  the  nineteenth  century  there  were  in 
the  countries  which  afterward  made  up  the  German 
Empire  24,000,000  people,  but  when  the  Great  War  began 
the  population  was  estimated  at  about  68,000,000. 
During  this  same  period  the  population  of  Great  Britain 
had  growTi  from  10,500,000  to  40,000,000  though  during 
the  same  time  that  of  Ireland  had  declined  from  8,000,000 
to  4,500,000.  The  enemies  of  France,  and  some  of  her 
friends,  said  that  France  was  decadent,  that  France  was 
an  old,  tired  nation,  which,  like  a  man  or  a  woman  late  in 
life,  was  not  possessed  of  the  vigor  and  fullness  that  cause 
early  marriages  and  large  families  and  increase  in  num- 
bers. Actually,  however,  there  had  long  been  in  France 
what  had  long  been  the  case  with  the  upper  and  more 
prosperous  classes  in  almost  every  other  country:  a  high 
standard  of  living  and  civilization,  and  a  desire  to  hand 
down  the  same  standard  to  the  people  of  the  next  genera- 
tion. The  land  of  France  was  divided  among  a  great 
number  of  small  proprietors,  who  could  maintain  them- 
selves in  comfort  and  high  standard,  and  bestow  the  same 


CAUSES    OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      431 


standard  upon  their  children,  provided  tlieir  property 
did  not  liave  to  be  divided  among  many  children.  Ac- 
cordingly, the  birth-rate  was  low.  On  the  other  hand,  in 
Italy  where  the  standard  of  living  was  low,  the  population 
increased  so  rapidly  that  large  numbers  of  enugranls 
had  to  abandon  a  country  that  could  not  support  them; 
and  in  Russia,  despite  an  appalling  mfant  mortality, 
population  increased  more  rapidly  still.  In  Germany, 
where  the  standard  was  high,  it  also  increased  rapidly,  so 
that  a  large  part  of  the  j)opulation  could  only  be  supported 
by  making  goods  to  be  exchanged  with  other  nations  for 
food.  It  was  Germany's  dearest  desire  to  have  more  good 
territory  in  which  to  expand  and  increase  her  numbers; 
while  the  rapid  increase,  which  she  had,  constantly  made 
her  more  powerful,  and  more  able  to  be  arrogant  and 
threatening  to  her  neighbors. 

There  were  particular  things  which  seemed  to  bode  ill 
for  the  future,  such  as  the  feeling  in  France  that  gross 
injustice  had  been  done  by  Germany  in  taking  Alsace- 
Lorraine,  though  the  desire  of  the  French  people  for  a 
war  of  revenge  had  largely  passed  away,  and  by  1914  it 
was  very  probable  that  France  would  never  go  to  war 
solely  to  win  the  "lost  provinces"  back.  Italy  wished 
much  for  the  lands  in  which  Italians  lived,  which  had  not 
been  given  to  her  at  the  time  when  her  unity  was  achieved; 
but  it  was  not  probable  that  she  would  go  to  war  to  ob- 
tain them  or  be  able  to  get  them  if  she  did.  Far  more 
important  were  the  riv^alry  between  Teuton  and  Slav  in 
eastern  Europe,  and  the  relations  between  Germany  and 
England  in  the  west. 

The  relations  between  Germany  and  England  in  earlier 
times  had  generally  been  good.  But  a  great  change  came 
at  the  end  of  the  century,  when  Germany,  having  built 
up  the  greatest  military  power  in  the  world,  seemed  to 
desire  naval  supremacy  also.  In  1SJ)S  and  in  1900  were 
passed  two  of  the  most  important  naval  measures  ever 


Birth-rate 

and 

expansion 


Interna- 
tional 
relations 


Germany 
and  Great 
Britain 


432 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


German 

naval 

expansion 


Apprehen- 
sion in 
Britain 


Ineffectual 
efforts  to 
reach  an 
understand- 
ing 


sanctioned  in  any  country.  Huge  appropriations  were 
passed  to  be  spent  methodically  according  to  plan  over  a 
number  of  years,  at  the  end  of  which  it  was  hoped  that  the 
German  Empire  would  have  a  war  fleet  so  powerful  that 
in  a  contest  the  mightiest  power  would  stake  its  very 
existence  on  the  outcome.  At  once  English  leaders  were 
alarmed.  The  British  Government  entered  into  the 
Entente  Cordiale  with  France  (1904)  and  settled  all  difla- 
culties  with  Russia  (1907).  The  people  themselves  were 
presently  aroused  at  the  prospect  of  great  danger.  More 
and  more  in  the  years  that  followed  was  the  attention  of 
people  in  Great  Britain  given  to  the  growth  and  ambitions 
of  Germany.  Additional  warships  were  built,  and  then, 
when  for  a  while  it  seemed  that  Germany  might  still  get 
ahead,  huge  appropriations  were  made  and  naval  con- 
struction carried  on  with  feverish  haste.  Many  people 
believed  that  there  was  no  danger;  but  many  more  thought 
that  the  British  Empire  was  threatened  by  the  greatest 
danger  that  had  ever  confronted  it.  There  were  not 
wanting  some  who  feared  that  the  Germans  might  strike 
without  any  declaration  of  war,  and,  evading  the  British 
fleet  some  misty  night,  suddenly  throw  into  England  a 
force  which  would  destroy  Great  Britain  completely,  with- 
out any  hope  of  redemption.  It  was  necessary,  then, 
to  be  perpetually  on  guard,  to  maintain  overwhelming  sea 
power,  and  perhaps  raise  a  great  army  for  defence. 

Some  attempts  were  made  to  end  this  rivalry  and  sus- 
picion. The  British  Government  tried  to  come  to  an  un- 
derstanding with  Germany  about  limiting  the  building  of 
battleships,  but  though  a  temporary  arrangement  was 
arrived  at,  no  real  agreement  could  be  reached,  since 
Germany  was  not  willing  to  give  up  her  effort  to  rival 
Great  Britain  on  the  seas.  The  British  people  desired  to 
avoid  a  conflict,  and  the  British  Government  made  a  sin- 
cere effort  to  remove  such  differences  as  existed  between 
the  two  nations.     In  doing  this,  large  and  generous  con- 


CAUSES    OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      433 


cessions  were  made,  especially  with  respect  to  the  Bagdad 
Railway  scheme;  but  it  cannot  he  known  what  good  results 
might  have  come,  since  the  agreement  was  reached  only 
a  little  before  the  Great  War  broke  out.  ]\Ieanwliile, 
such  had  been  the  revolution  in  affairs,  that  Great  Britain, 
who  had  for  nearly  a  century  kept  outside  Continental 
affairs,  now  considered  herself  unable  to  stand  without 
friends  in  Europe,  her  statesmen  were  constantly  watching 
Germany's  every  move,  and  it  had  become  the  corner- 
stone of  her  foreign  policy  that  in  no  circumstances 
must  she  ever  allow  France,  her  best  friend,  to  be  crushed 
by  the  German  armies. 

Less  acute  and  less  evident,  perhaps,  was  another  and 
vaster  rivalry,  between  the  Teutonic  peoples,  especially 
the  Germans,  in  central  Europe,  and  the  Slavic  peoples, 
especially  Russia,  in  the  east,  a  contest  which  principally 
concerned  Constantinople  and  the  Balkans.  For  ages 
this  contest  had  lasted.  Once  the  Slavs  had  pushed  the 
Teutons  almost  to  the  Elbe  and  the  Rhine.  Then  the  tide 
turned.  The  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  in  central 
Europe  is  to  a  considerable  extent  the  story  of  the  re- 
conquest  of  lands  by  the  Germans  from  the  Slavs.  In  this 
way  was  eastern  Prussia  built  up,  and  it  is  thought  that 
the  Slavic  continues  to  be  the  largest  element  in  the 
Prussian  people.  In  this  way  also  was  the  power  of 
Austria  extended,  and  there  were  more  Slavs  in  Austria 
than  there  were  Germans  and  more  Slavs  in  Hungary 
than  Magyars.  Poland  had  once  been  the  great  champion 
of  the  Slavs,  but  she  had  disappeared,  and  her  place  of 
leadership  had  been  taken  by  the  Empire  of  Russia.  The 
rivalry  now  was  concerned  largely  with  the  mastery  of  the 
Balkan  Peninsula. 

In  the  days  when  the  Eastern  Roman  Empire  was 
decaying  the  Balkan  Peninsula  had  been  occupied  largely 
by  South  Slavic  peoples.  In  course  of  time  they  were 
overwhelmed  and  submerged  by  the  Turks.     In  the  nine- 


An  under- 
standing 
almost 
reached 


Teuton  and 
Slav 


The  South 
Slavs  and 
the  Balkans 


434 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Russia, 
leader  of 
the  Slavs 


Germany, 
the  Balkans, 
Asiatic 
Turkey 


Asia  Minor 


teenth  century  they  and  the  Greeks  gained  their  freedom 
once  more.  To  this  freedom  they  had  all  been  helped  by 
Russia,  to  whom  they  looked  as  their  protector  and  the 
great  leader  of  their  race.  Russia  desired  to  protect  them 
or  perhaps  some  day  incorporate  them  in  a  great  Pan- 
Russian  domain,  and  she  held  these  feelings  not  only 
because  she  was  ambitious  but  because  she  felt  the  ties 
of  religion  and  race :  they  were  all  of  them  Slavic  in  blood 
and  they  held  the  Greek  Catholic  faith.  Also  Russia 
greatly  desired  to  have  Constantinople  and  an  outlet  on 
the  Mediterranean.  This  would  never  be  possible,  per- 
haps, unless  she  controlled  the  Balkans. 

These  ambitions  of  Russia  conflicted  directly  with  what 
had  come  to  be  the  first  ambition  of  the  Germanic  peoples, 
and  their  best  chance  of  founding  a  greater  empire. 
There  was  no  territory  in  Europe  into  which  the  Germans 
could  expand  without  taking  it  away  from  some  neighbor 
as  the  result  of  a  war;  and  of  colonies,  England  and  France 
had  taken  almost  all  of  the  best  that  were  to  be  had. 
There  did  seem  to  be  some  possibility  of  expansion  in 
South  America  and  in  the  Far  East,  but  for  the  present  the 
Monroe  Doctrine  debarred  Germany  from  taking  Latin 
American  countries,  and  after  the  Russo-Japanese  War 
(1904-5),  European  acquisition  in  China  came  to  an  end, 
since  this  was  now  opposed  by  Japan.  It  might  be 
that  some  day  Germany  could  take  away  the  colonial 
dominion  of  France,  or  even  the  far-flung  possessions  of  the 
British  Empire;  but  if  these  things  came  they  must  be  the 
result  of  a  victorious  war,  won  by  greater  Germany  in  the 
future.  One  inviting  field  remained,  and  that  was  in  the 
domain  of  Turkey,  mostly  m  Asia  Minor,  which  was  thinly 
peopled  and  backward  now  under  the  rule  of  the  Turk, 
but  which  had  once  been  a  seat  of  civilization,  populous, 
important,  and  wealthy.  Under  German  rule  it  might 
come  to  be  so  again. 

Accordingly,  the  German  Government  had  cultivated 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   435 


good  relations  with  the  Turks,  and  had  recently  become 
so  influential  in  their  government  that  'J'urkey  was  be- 
coming an  appendage  of  the  (ierman  aUiance.  But 
in  order  that  the  German  Empire  might  liave  control  of  the 
Turkish  dominions  it  seemed  necessary  that  the  Dual 
Monarchy  and  Germany  together  should  control  the  Bal- 
kan Peninsula  which  lay  in  between.  This  suited  very 
well  the  schemes  of  Austria  Hungary  who  desired  to 
extend  to  the  south.  Gradually  the  i)lan  took  shape. 
The  two  principal  members  of  the  rriple  Alliance  were  to 
dominate  the  Balkans  and  thence  get  control  of  the 
Turkish  Empire  and  so  build  up  across  "Middle  Europe" 
an  empire  which  would  extend  from  the  North  Sea  to 
the  Persian  Gulf.  To  hold  it  together,  to  carry  on  a  great 
trade  with  profit,  to  defend  it  in  time  of  war,  a  railroad 
must  bind  all  the  parts.  Already  most  of  such  a  railroad 
existed.  From  the  ports  of  the  North  Sea  and  the  Baltic 
lines  ran  to  Berlin,  then  to  Vienna  and  Budapest,  thence 
to  Belgrade,  and  on  to  Constantinople.  The  Germans 
wished  to  extend  this  line  of  comnmnication  by  building 
the  "Bagdad  Railway,"  which,  starting  on  the  shore  of  the 
Bosporus  opposite  Constantinople,  would  run  across  Asia 
Minor  and  across  ancient  ]\Iesopotamia  to  the  city  of 
Bagdad,  so  famed  in  the  Arabian  Nighis,  and  thence  on 
to  the  Persian  Gulf,  while  a  branch  w^ould  run  southward 
along  the  Mediterranean  past  Egypt  to  the  Arabian  cities 
of  Mohammed. 

Realization  of  this  scheme  of  Middle  Europe  would 
make  it  impossible  to  fulfil  the  greater  ambitions  of  the 
Slavs,  and  it  was  therefore  strongly  oj)posed  by  Russia. 
The  field  in  which  these  conflicting  ambitions  most  clashed 
was  the  Balkan  Peninsula,  the  mastery  of  which  was  in- 
dispensable to  success  for  either  side.  Hence  the  Balkans 
became  the  principal  danger-spot  of  Europe.  Twice  did 
a  great  war  almost  break  out  because  of  disputes  over  this 
district.     In  1908  Austria-Hungary  annexed  Bosnia  and 


Mittel- 
Europa  and 
the  Bagdad 
Railway 


Rivalry 
in  the 
Balkans 


436 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Balkan 
crises 


The  Ger- 
mans 


Herzegovina.  Russia  strongly  objected,  but  Germany 
stood  beside  her  ally,  and  Russia  yielded,  suffering  thus 
a  diplomatic  defeat.  In  1912-13  another  crisis  developed 
when  the  small  Balkan  nations  overthrew  Turkey,  took 
from  her  almost  all  of  her  territory  in  Europe,  and  then 
fought  among  themselves  in  dividing  it  up.  On  this  <^- 
casion  the  Germans,  and  especially  the  Austrians,  suffered 
loss,  since  the  power  of  Turkey  seemed  to  be  destroyed, 
and  Servia,  Austria's  bitterest  foe,  extended  her  territory 
and  became  more  ambitious.  It  seemed  now  that  Russia 
and  the  Triple  Entente  had  the  greatest  influence  in  the 
Balkans.  The  subject  Slavic  peoples  in  the  Dual  Mon- 
archy became  restless,  and  hoped  that  some  day  they 
could  be  independent  or  else  join  the  Servian  kingdom. 
Worst  of  all,  if  a  hostile  Servia  remained  independent, 
there  could  scarcely  be  a  Middle  Europe  with  through 
railroad  communication  from  Hamburg  to  Bagdad,  since 
it  was  almost  necessary  that  this  railroad  should  run 
across  Servia  up  the  valley  of  the  Morava  River.  This 
was  indeed  the  cause  which  led  directly  to  the  war.  The 
Teutonic  powers  were  determined  that  an  independent  Ser- 
via should  not  stand  in  their  way.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
was  nearly  certain  that  if  Russia  allowed  Servia  to  be 
crushed,  then  her  great  hopes  must  come  to  an  end. 
Hence  there  were  endless  plots  and  constant  watching  to 
see  that  neither  side  gained  any  advantage. 

The  last  and  the  greatest  of  the  causes  of  the  war  was 
Germany  herself.  The  character,  the  ambitions,  the 
ideals  of  her  rulers  and  her  people  made  a  great  war  prob- 
able whatever  other  causes  existed.  The  Germans, 
from  rapid  and  mighty  success,  had  become  selfish,  cynical, 
hard,  steeped  in  materialism,  and  filled  with  belief  that 
they  were  superior  and  high  above  others.  No  people  had 
developed  so  greatly  in  so  short  a  time  as  the  Germans 
since  the  founding  of  their  empire.  Just  before  the  war 
they  were  surpassed  in  manufacturing  only  by  the  United 


GENERAL   DRAFTING  CO. INC  N  Y 


25.    SUPPOSED  ] 


^ 


Central  Europe  and  its  Annex,  in  the  Near  East 

(Germany,  Austria,  Hungary,  Bulgaria,  Turkey) 

Territory  occupied  by  Central  Powers 

Germany's  Main  Route  to  the  East 

(Berlin-Bagdad,  Berlin-Hodeida,  Berlin-Cairo-Cape) 

Additional  Routes 

(Berlin-Trieste,  Berlin-Saloniki-Athens,  Berlin-Constantza-Constantinoplej 

Portions  under  construction 


-GERMAN  PLAN 


P  : 

A    t 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   437 


States,  in  commerce  only  by  Great  Britain,  they  were  the 
strongest  military  power  in  the  world,  they  were  hiiildiii^ 
one  of  the  greatest  navies,  their  popuhilion  and  national 
wealth  were  increasing  in  amazing  manner.  They  had 
succeeded  because  of  high  intelligenc-e,  industry,  and  their 
excellent  organization.  But  they  had  also  succeeded  by 
force  and  by  fraud  and  by  might.  And  as  the  years  went 
on,  their  character  and  outlook  underwent  a  notable 
change. 

Other  peoples  have  believed  themselves  to  be  the 
greatest  and  the  best  in  the  world — the  Greeks  and  the 
Romans  once,  the  British,  the  French,  the  Russians,  the 
Japanese,  and  the  people  of  the  United  States.  But  in 
modern  times  there  has  been  no  such  extreme  belief  as  that 
which  was  cherished  by  the  Germans.  "  The  Teutons  are 
the  aristocracy  of  humanity,"  said  a  well-known  writer. 
"The  Teutonic  race  is  called  to  encircle  the  earth  with  its 
rule,  to  exploit  the  treasures  of  nature  and  of  human 
labor,  and  to  make  the  passive  races  servient  elements  in 
its  cultural  development."  He  declared  that  the  great 
work  of  the  world  had  been  done  by  men  of  Teutonic  race, 
that  Leonardo  da  Vinci,  Galileo,  and  Voltaire  were  actually 
of  Teutonic  strain,  and  that  Alexander  the  Great  and 
Julius  Ctesar  were  of  the  Teutonic  type.  "Whoever  has 
the  characteristics  of  the  Teutonic  race  is  superior."  Such 
teachings  were  spread  broadcast  through  the  German 
Empire  in  popular  form,  and  after  a  while  generally  be- 
lieved in. 

Above  all  did  the  German  people  believe  that  they  were 
superior  in  war  to  all  others.  They  had  humbled  all  with 
whom  they  had  fought.  There  were  still  other  and  greater 
foes,  but  the  reckoning  would  come  with  them  also.  An 
accounting  would  come  with  Russia,  and  many  Ger- 
mans looked  eagerly  forward  to  "the  daj-,"  when  the 
British  Empire  was  to  be  laid  low  by  the  valor  of  their 
arms.     Long-continued    militarism  had  accustomed   the 


Belief  in 
racial  super 
iority 


Glorification 
of  war 


438 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Gennan 
success  in 
previous 
wars 


Arrogance 
and  bound- 
less ambi- 
tion 


Germans  to  ideas  of  war;  great  success  in  their  recent 
wars,  confident  belief  in  their  superiority  and  future  suc- 
cess caused  many  to  beheve  that  war  was  a  good  thing 
in  itself.  "Perpetual  peace  is  a  dream,"  wrote  Field- 
Marshal  von  Moltke  in  1880,  "war  is  part  of  the  eternal 
order  instituted  by  God."  Others  declared  that  war  was 
a  part  of  the  struggle  for  survival  of  the  fittest,  which,  they 
said,  was  everywhere  and  always  gomg  on  in  the  evolution 
of  things.  Through  war  it  was  that  the  superior  German 
people  would  triumph  over  other,  inferior  nations.  And 
as  a  result  of  the  victories  to  come  Germany  would  take 
away  from  the  vanquished  their  possessions,  which  it  was 
more  fitting  that  she  should  have.  It  would  be  better 
for  the  world  if  Germans  possessed  France  and  parts  of 
Russia  and  wide  domains  everywhere,  since  then  the 
greatest  and  the  best  of  peoples  would  have  chance  for 
development  larger  and  freer. 

As  Germany  became  greater  and  stronger  each  year,  as 
belief  in  the  glorious  destiny  of  the  Germans  was  preached 
and  taught  in  the  schools  and  everywhere  circulated  in 
cheap  and  popular  writings,  as  Germans  believed  more  in 
the  goodness  of  war  and  in  their  invincible  army  and  navy, 
their  ambition  and  arrogance  became  boundless.  Not 
only  military  men  but  many  others  dreamed  fondly  of  the 
mighty  victories  to  come,  and  books  were  published  con- 
taining maps  of  the  world  with  the  best  parts  under  Ger- 
man rule.  All  this  was  well  expressed  in  the  writings  of 
General  von  Bernhardi,  especially  in  his  book,  Deutsch- 
land  wid  der  Ndchste  Krieg  {Germany  and  the  Next  War), 
published  in  1911.  He  maintained  that  war  was  a  thing 
excellent  in  itself.  Through  great  wars  would  Germany's 
future  be  assured.  First  "France  must  be  so  completely 
crushed  that  never  again  can  she  come  across  our  path"; 
then  would  come  the  reckoning  with  England.  The  next 
war  would  be  for  Weltmacht  oder  Untergang,  world-power  or 
downfall.     And  so  in  the  end  it  was. 


CAUSES    OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      439 


Alon^  with  this  materiahsm,  this  ambition,  this  heh'ef 
in  the  goodness  of  war,  and  the  great  plans  wliicli  were 
cherished,  went  gradually  a  change  in  character,  which 
affected  many  persons  with  a  terrible  jjerversioii,  for  a 
while  not  understood  by  outsiders.  Old  niaxinis,  (jftcn 
preached  before  and  often  abandoned  as  people  improved, 
were  revived  now  and  strengthened.  Since  war  was 
so  good,  force  was  the  deciding  factor,  and  might  made 
right.  Since  the  Germans  were  superior,  and  their  aims 
for  the  good  of  the  world,  whatever  they  did  to  secure  their 
ends  was  right,  the  end  justified  the  means.  Since  the 
Germans  were  superior,  a  particular  code  existed  for  them: 
they  were  not  bound  by  ordinary  moral  laws.  The  old 
teachings  of  Christ,  that  mercy  and  mildness  should  be 
shown,  and  that  men  should  do  by  others  as  they  would 
have  others  do  unto  them,  were  openly  scoffed  at  by 
teachers  who  proclaimed  that  Germans  were  .mperme?i,  who 
should,  by  force  or  fraud  or  any  means,  obtain  mastery 
over  inferior  people.  Cruelty,  terror,  hardness  of  heart 
might  always  be  employed  by  Germans  in  a  coolly  scien- 
tific and  deliberate  way  to  ensure  the  success  which  was 
theirs  by  right.  Nor  need  promises  be  kept  or  treaties 
observed,  if  such  observance  hindered  success. 

These  teachings  were  widely  proclaimed  and  often 
repeated,  but  they  attracted  little  attention  outside  of 
Germany.  For  the  most  part  they  were  so  different  from 
what  humane  people  allowed  themselves  to  tliink  of  or 
tried  to  believe  that  it  seemed  then  incredible  that  Ger- 
mans could  deliberately  entertain  them.  But  in  Germany 
they  w'ere  received  with  earnest  attention,  and  made 
greater  impression  as  time  went  on.  They  were  probably 
the  greatest  reason,  after  all,  why  the  other  factors  that 
tended  toward  a  European  conflict  actually  developed 
into  war.  They  were  also  the  principal  reason  why,  after 
the  Great  War  began,  the  greater  part  of  the  world  turned 
from  Germany  with  such  horror  and  loatliing. 


Old  doc- 
trines 
terrible 
again 


Effects  of 
these  doc- 
trines 


440 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Drifting 
toward  a 
great  war 


Sarajevo 
and  the 
Austrian 
note,  1914 


The  ten 
demands 


So  in  the  years  after  1870,  and  especially  after  1900, 
many  factors  in  Europe  tended  to  bring  on  a  struggle  of 
nations.  Several  times  a  great  war  nearly  came  to  pass, 
but  each  time  it  was  averted.  By  1913,  however,  condi- 
tions had  become  such  that  it  would  be  almost  impossible 
to  avoid  a  great  conflict  if  another  occasion  arose.  We 
know  now,  what  was  hidden  then,  that  the  Teutonic 
powers  were  at  last  fully  determined  to  secure  certain 
things,  especially  in  the  Balkans,  If  they  could,  they 
would  get  them  without  war.  They  were  ready  to  fight 
for  them  if  they  must  fight. 

The  immediate  cause  of  the  war  developed  from  a 
single  episode.  June  28,  1914,  the  Archduke  Franz  Ferdi- 
nand, heir  to  the  Austrian  and  Hungarian  thrones,  and  his 
wife  were  assassinated  in  Sarajevo,  the  capital  of  Bosnia. 
The  assassins  were  Bosnians,  but  the  affair  at  once  took 
on  an  ominous  aspect  when  it  was  known  that  Austria- 
Hungary  considered  the  crime  to  have  been  plotted  in 
Servia  with  the  knowledge  of  the  government  at  Belgrade. 
It  was  rightly  suspected  that  opportunity  would  now  be 
seized  to  reduce  Servia  to  the  dependence  which  Germany 
and  Austria  desired.  The  worst  suspicions  were  con- 
firmed when,  about  a  month  later,  July  24,  a  note  was 
addressed  to  the  Servian  Government,  declaring  that  it  had 
acted  in  hostile  way  toward  its  neighbor,  that  it  was  a 
source  of  danger,  and  that  evidently  the  infamous  murder 
of  the  archduke  had  resulted  largely  therefrom.  Ac- 
cordingly, ten  demands  were  presented  which  must  be 
acceded  to  in  full  within  forty-eight  hours.  One  of  these 
demands  was  that  Servia  should  remove  officials  "whose 
names  and  deeds  the  Austro-Hungarian  Government  re- 
serve to  themselves  the  right  of  communicating";  while 
another  was  that  Austro-Hungarian  representatives  be 
permitted  to  take  part  in  court  proceedings  in  Servia 
and  in  measures  undertaken  there  with  respect  to  those 
engaged  in  activities  against  the  Dual  Monarchy. 


CAUSES     OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      441 


At  once  it  was  the  o])iiiion  of  those  wlio  read  the  note 
that  it  had  been  so  drafted  as  not  to  he  accej)table.  Sir 
Edward  (irey,  British  secretary  for  foreign  affairs,  and 
one  of  the  ablest  and  best  diplomats  in  Europe,  declared 
that  he  had  never  seen  so  formidable  a  document  ad- 
dressed to  an  indei)endent  state.  If  Servia  yielded  what 
was  now  asked  she  would  forego  her  sovereignty  and 
independence,  and  become  in  effect  a  dependency  of  the 
power  to  whom  she  yielded.  If  this  took  place,  then 
Austria,  and  with  her  the  German  Empire,  would  secure 
in  the  Balkans  the  supremacy  for  which  they  had  so  long 
striven,  especially  the  vital  advantage  of  controlling 
Servia  and  a  part  of  the  route  of  the  railway  to  Con- 
stantinople. No  state  can  retain  its  sovereignty  and 
allow  representatives  of  a  foreign  power  to  take  part  in  the 
business  of  its  law  courts,  and  if  any  power  promised  un- 
conditionally to  dismiss  such  officials  as  were  afterward 
to  be  named,  not  only  would  it  submit  to  a  demand 
subversive  of  its  independence  but  it  would  be  possible  for 
the  foreign  power  to  cause  it  to  remodel  its  government  in 
such  manner  as  to  render  it  entirely  submissive. 

Servia  at  once  appealed  to  Russia  for  support.  Servians 
could  count  on  the  sympathy  of  Russia,  and  it  was  prob- 
able that  Russia  would  not  stand  aside  and  see  Servia 
crushed  and  Germany  and  Austria  obtain  immediate 
preponderance  in  the  Balkans.  Austria  unaided  would 
probably  be  no  match  for  Russia,  but  she  would  certainly 
be  supported  by  the  German  Ehipire.  It  was  now  as 
proper  and  fundamental  a  policy  for  Germany  to  refuse 
to  allow  Austria-Hungary  to  be  destroyed  as  it  was  for  the 
British  Empire  to  be  determined  to  give  France  support. 
Accordingly,  men  believed  that  such  a  note  would  never 
have  been  dispatched  from  Vienna  without  the  knowledge 
and  approval  of  Berlin.  The  German  authorities  an- 
nounced that  they  approved  the  contents  of  the  note, 
but  declared  that  they  had  not  known  those  contents  be- 


The  inde- 
pendence of 
Servia  at 
stake 


Danger  of 
a  general 
conflict 


442 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
Government 
promises 
Austria- 
Hungary 
support  in 
advance 


Austria 
makes  war 
on  Servia 


forehand.  Strictly  this  may  have  been  true.  But  it  is 
now  certain  that  Count  Berchtold,  Austrian  minister  of 
foreign  affairs,  who  had  determined  upon  a  bold  stroke, 
had  obtained  from  Germany  general  promise  of  sup- 
port for  whatever  policy  Austria  undertook,  July  5  the 
German  Government  secretly  declared:  "Austria  must 
judge  what  is  to  be  done  to  clear  up  her  relation  to  Servia; 
whatever  Austria's  decision  may  turn  out  to  be,  Austria 
can  count  with  certainty  upon  it,  that  Germany  will  stand 
behind  her  as  an  ally  and  friend."  But  bad  as  it  would 
be  if  Russia  came  to  the  help  of  Servia,  and  Germany  to 
the  support  of  Austria-Hungary,  the  mischief  would  not 
stop  there.  France  was  bound  to  support  Russia  by 
the  terms  of  the  military  convention,  and  it  was  her 
primary  interest  not  to  abandon  Russia,  unless  Russia  was 
making  wicked  and  wanton  aggression.  And  if  France 
were  drawn  in,  it  was  most  probable  that  before  long 
England  would  come  to  her  support.  Then  a  great 
European  war  would  have  begun,  and  it  was  impossible 
to  tell  how  far  it  might  afterward  extend.  Accordingly, 
those  statesmen  who  desired  to  avert  such  catastrophe 
now  bent  all  their  efforts  to  quenching  the  fire  that  had 
been  started. 

In  the  terrible  Twelve  Days,  July  24  to  August  4,  many 
efforts  were  made  to  settle  the  affair  and  keep  peace.  The 
British  and  French  ministers  in  Belgrade  urged  Servia  to 
return  a  satisfactory  reply.  The  Servian  Government 
humbled  itself  to  the  dust  and  accepted  most  of  the  de- 
mands, not  completely  yielding  to  those  which  threatened 
its  independence,  though  offering  to  refer  the  decision  of 
them  to  the  Hague  Tribunal.  Austria  refused  to  con- 
sider the  reply,  and  dec^red  war  ^n  Servia,  July  28.  At 
once  an  invasion  began.  And  now  Russia  appeared  upon 
the  scene.  The  day  before,  the  tsar  had  declared:  "Russia 
will  in  no  case  disinterest  herself  in  the  fate  of  Servia." 
The  tsar's  council  had  already  decided  to  mobilize  part 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   443 

of  the  Russian  army  against  Austria,  if  necessary.   IMean- 
while,  strong  representations  were  made. 

Every  hour  the  menace  of  war  grew  more  dreadful.   The     Austria, 
other  Great  Powers  now  bent  themselves  to  keeping  tlie     Germany, 
peace  between  Austria  and  Russia.     Great  Brilaiu,  France,     ^"^^la 
and  Italy  tried  to  do  it  in  one  way;  Germany  iricd  it    in 
another.     In  the  first  group  Enghind  took  the  lead.     Sir 
Edward   Grey   proposed   that   a   conference  of  the  four 
powers  be  held  to  mediate  between  Russia  and  Austria- 
Hungary  and  work  for  a  satisfactory  solution;  but  with 
such  a  scheme  Germany  would  have  nothing  to  do,  saying 
that  she  could  not  take  part  in  bringing  her  all\'  before  a 
European  tribunal.     Germany  had  a  plan  very  different. 
She  attempted  to  terrify  Russia  by  threats,  and  so  prevent 
her  supporting  Servia's  cause.     The  dispute,  she  said,  was 
an  affair  merely  between  Austria  and  Servia;  no  outside 
party   should   intervene;   any  such  intercession   "would 
precipitate  inconceivable  consequences."     In  Russia  and 
in  Germany  military  leaders  now  secretly  urged  on  prepa- 
rations for  war,  so  as  to  take  the  other  at  a  disadvantage, 
the  measures  of  each  one  driving  the  other  still  further. 
The  German  emperor  promised  to  use  his  influence  to     Kaiser 
bring  about  a  satisfactory  understanding  between  Austria     ^'^  tsar 
and  Russia,  but  the  German  ambassador  in  St.  Petersburg 
was   instructed   to  say   that  Russian   military   measures 
would  be  answered  by  mobilizing  the  German  armj-,  and 
"mobilization  means  war."     July  29,  the  German  em- 
peror telegraphed  to  the  tsar  that  it  was  perfectly  pos- 
sible for  Russia  to  "remain  a  spectator"  in  the  Austro- 
Servian   war.     Next  day  he  said  the  tsar  must  decide: 
"You  have  to  bear  the  responsibiHty  for  war  or  peace." 
Germany  probably  wished  that  a  war  be  avoided,  and 
preferred  peace,  so  long  as  she  and  her  ally  got  what 
they  asked  for;  otherwise  they  were  quite  willing  to  fight. 
On  the  contrary,  Great  Britain  and  France,  and,  to  some 
extent,  Russia,  earncstlv  wished  to  avoid  war,  and  were 


444 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Great 
War  begins: 
Germany 
declares  war 
on  Russia 


Germany 
declares  war 
on  France 


trying  hard  to  bring  about  a  compromise  and  satisfactory 
arrangement.  Austria  would  make  no  compromise  what- 
ever, and  Germany  was  bound  by  the  secret  promise  to 
support  her. 

Meanwhile,  Austrian  armies  continued  their  march  into 
Scr^^a.  The  protests  of  Russia  effected  nothing.  Then 
on  the  night  of  July  29,  almost  at  the  same  moment, 
Russian  and  Austrian  armies  were  mobilized  against  each 
other.  Face  to  face  with  the  dread  conflict  Austria  seemed 
to  hesitate.  Then  Germany  stepped  forward,  and  set- 
tled the  affair  herself.  Her  diplomats  were  thrust  aside 
by  the  Great  General  Staff,  which  now  got  control.  Rus- 
sia, more  and  more  threatened  by  Germany,  was  mobiliz- 
ing all  her  forces.  July  31  the  German  Government 
demanded  that  Russia  stop  all  mobilization  within  twelve 
hours,  and  France  was  asked  what  she  would  do  if  a  Russo- 
German  war  were  begun.  Russia  returned  no  answer. 
August  1  the  German  Empire  declared  war  upon  Russia. 

Neither  England  nor  France  had  much  direct  interest 
in  Balkan  affairs,  and  both  of  them  greatly  wished  peace. 
But  the  hour  of  fate  was  at  hand  for  France.  The  Ger- 
man ambassador  in  Paris  was  bidden  to  insist  on  a  reply 
to  the  German  inquiry,  and  it  is  now  known  that  he  was 
also  instructed,  in  case  France  promised  to  leave  Russia 
to  her  fate,  to  demand  that  the  French  hand  over  to  the 
German  authorities  certain  strong  fortresses  in  pledge. 
But  the  reply  was  that  "France  would  do  that  which  her 
interests  dictated."  Two  days  later,  August  3,  Germany 
declared  war  upon  France,  falsely  affirming  that  France 
had  attacked  her  first.  Actually  the  French,  in  their 
great  desire  to  avoid  war,  had  drawn  their  forces  back 
some  seven  miles  from  their  frontier.  But  also  in  thi^ 
moment  of  destiny  the  French  people  stood  up  in  un- 
conquerable spirit  before  the  greatest  danger  that  had 
ever  approached  them. 

Thus  the  Continent  was  engulfed  in  war.     Great  Britain 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR   445 


was  close  to  the  brink.  More  than  any  other  power  had 
England  striven  for  peace.  Every  resource  had  been 
tried.  It  was  not  iniprohahle  that  France  and  Russia 
would  be  crushed,  and  British  statesmen  realized,  what 
many  of  their  people  did  not  clearly  see  yet,  that  if  France 
were  crushed,  then  Britain's  best  friend  would  be  gone, 
and  Britain  would  be  left,  perhaps,  to  face  alone  a  mightier 
Germany  in  the  future.  It  would  be  better  to  support 
France  now.  Yet  the  British  peoj)lc  and  parliament 
wished  to  stay  out  of  the  war,  and  France  could  get  no 
assurance  that  England  would  give  her  assistance.  Al- 
most certainly  England  would  have  come  to  the  help  of 
France  before  the  conflict  was  over,  but  it  might  well  be 
that  her  help  would  have  come  too  late.  August  2  a  prom- 
ise was  given  that  the  British  fleet  would  protect  French 
shipping  and  the  north  coast  of  France,  and  afterward 
this  would  undoubtedly  have  been  regarded  by  Germany 
as  an  unfriendly  act,  whenever  it  suited  her  to  do  so.  But 
meanwhile  Germany  was  striving  to  keep  Britain  out  of 
the  war,  and  Sir  Edward  Grey  had  already  declared  that  if 
Germany  and  Austria  would  make  "any  reasonable  pro- 
posal" for  keeping  the  peace,  and  it  became  clear  that 
France  and  Russia  were  not  trying  to  keep  it,  then  Great 
Britain  "would  have  nothing  more  to  do  with  the  conse- 
quences." 

An  event  now  occurred  which  caused  Great  Britain 
to  enter  the  struggle  at  once.  Germany  violated  the 
neutrality  of  Belgium.  The  plans  of  the  German  General 
Staff  called  for  the  immediate  crushing  of  France  and  then 
afterward  attacking  Russia  alone.  If  this  was  to  succeed, 
there  must  be  no  dela3\  But  the  frontier  between  Ger- 
many and  France  was  not  long,  and  it  was  so  strongly 
fortified  that  it  seemed  probable  much  time  would  be  lost 
in  getting  through.  Between  Germany  and  France  also 
lay  the  neutralized  countries  of  Switzerland,  Luxemburg, 
and    Belgium.     Both    Luxemburg    and    Belgium    afford 


Germany 
and  Great 
Britain 


Violation 
the  neu- 
trality of 
Belgium 


of 


446 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  easy 
road  into 
France 


"A  scrap  of 
paper" 


easy  and  admirable  entrance  into  the  most  vital  part  of 
France.  It  was  true,  the  inviolability  of  the  territory 
of  these  small  states  was  guaranteed  by  treaties  which 
had  long  been  regarded  as  sacred  and  as  part  of  the  public 
law  of  Europe,  and  the  German  Empire  was  engaged  to 
uphold  them.  Nevertheless,  Germany  at  once  began 
pouring  an  enormous  force  through  Luxemburg  and  de- 
manded that  the  Belgian  Government  allow  free  passage. 
One  of  the  finest  things  in  history  was  the  splendid  way 
in  which  Belgium,  suddenly  asked  to  forfeit  her  neutraliza- 
tion and  threatened  with  terrible  fate  if  she  refused,  bravely 
called  upon  the  German  Government  to  keep  its  promise, 
and  then  tried  to  resist  the  German  armies,  which  struck 
her  at  once.  Immediately  Belgium  appealed  to  the  Great 
Powers;  Russia,  France,  and  Great  Britain  promised  such 
help  as  they  could  give. 

The  position  of  Belgium  is  such  that  if  she  were  in  the 
hands  of  a  strong  power  hostile  to  Great  Britain,  then  the 
very  existence  of  Britain  would  be  threatened.  It  had 
therefore  long  been  a  cardinal  principle  of  British  states- 
manship that  the  neutrality  and  independence  of  Belgium 
must  be  maintained.  Now,  August  4,  the  British  am- 
bassador in  Berlin  was  instructed  to  present  an  ultimatum 
demanding  that  Germany  withdraw  her  forces  from  Bel- 
gium at  once.  The  chancellor  of  the  Empire,  Von  Beth- 
mann-Hollweg,  refused,  saying  bitterly  that  England  was 
going  to  war  for  Belgian  neutrahty,  "just  for  a  scrap  of 
paper."  Thus  did  the  highest  official  of  Germany  speak 
of  the  treaty  obligations  of  his  government.  Before  the 
Reichstag  he  admitted  that  Germany  had  done  wrong — 
"necessity  knows  no  law."  "From  this  admission,"  said  a 
German  writer  afterward,  "neither  God  nor  the  devil  will 
ever  set  us  free."  At  midnight  of  August  4,  when  the 
time  of  the  ultimatum  had  expired,  Great  Britain  entered 
the  war. 


CAUSES   OF    THE    GREAT    WAR      447 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Militarism  and  the  rivalry  of  nations:  G.  H.  Terris,  A  Short 
History  of  War  and  Peace  (1911),  for  an  elementary  introduc- 
tion; H.  N.  Brailsford,  The  War  of  Steel  and  Gold,  a  Stiidij  of  the 
Armed  Peace  (1914);  P.  Camena  d'Almeida  UArmee  Allemande 
avant  et  pendant  la  Guerre  de  191Jt--19lH  (1920);  A  (iauvain, 
L'Europe  avant  la  Guerre  (1917);  General  C.  von  der  Goltz, 
Das  Volk  in  Wajfen,  trans,  by  F.  A.  Aslnvorth,  A  Nation  in  Arms 
(1915);  E.  F.  Henderson,  Germamfs  Fitjhtinfj  Machine  (1914); 
Walter  Lippman,  The  Stakes  of  Dipl</tnaci/  (1915);  Munroe 
Smith,  Militarism  and  Statecraft  (1918);  J.  Poirier,  U Evolution 
de  VArmee  Allemande  de  18S8-1913  (1914);  J.  T.  W.  Xewbold, 
How  Europe  Armed  for  War  (1916);  E.  A.  Pratt,  The  Rise  of 
Rail-Power  in  War  and  Conquest,  1833-19H  (1910);  and  for 
general  considerations  on  war  and  national  rivalry,  Dr.  G.  F. 
Nicolai,  Die  Biologie  des  Krieges  (1918),  trans,  by  C.  A.  and  J. 
Grande,  The  Biology  of  War  (1919);  H.  H.  Powers,  The  Things 
Men  Fight  For  (1916),  a  very  suggestive  book. 

Pacifism:  Norman  Angell  [R.  N.  A.  Lane,]  The  Great  Illusion 
(ed.  1914),  a  book  which  was  the  cause  of  considerable  mislead- 
ing and  delusion;  G.  G.  Coulton,  The  Main  Illusions  of  Pacificism 
(1916). 

German  spirit  and  ambition:  for  a  brief  statement  the  most 
illuminating  account  is  J.  A.  Cramb,  Germany  and  England 
(1914),  a  book  of  rare  beauty  and  power;  Friedrich  von  Bern- 
hardi,  Deutschland  und  der  Ndchste  Krieg  (1911),  trans,  by  A. 
H.  Powles,  Germany  and  the  Next  War  (1912);  Georges  Bourdon, 
L'Enigme  Allemande  (1913);  H.  S.  Chamberlain,  trans,  by 
John  Lees,  The  Foundations  of  the  Nineteenth  Century,  2  vols. 
(1911);  Thomas  Mann,  Bcfrachtungen  eines  Unpolitschen 
(1918);  Wallace  Notestein  and  E.  E.  Stoll,  Conquest  and  Kultur 
(1917)  and  Anonymous,  Out  of  Their  Own  Mouths  (1917),  for 
collections  of  extracts  and  quotations  translated;  Jacques 
Riviere,  UAllemand  (1918);  Otto-Richard  Tannenberg,  Gross- 
Deutschland  (1911);  R.  G.  Usher,  Pan-Germanism  (1913).  Also 
for  German  plans  of  expansion:  H.  Andrillon,  L' Expansion  de 
VAllemagne  (1914),  concerning  economic  expansion;  S.  Grum- 
bach,  Das  Annexionistische  Deutschland  (1917). 

Nationalism:  E.  B.  Krehbiel,  Nationalism,  War  and  Society 
(1916);  A.  J.  Toynbee,  Nationality  and  the  War  (1915). 

Diplomatic  negotiations  just  before  the  war:  the  best  and 


448  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

most  convenient  collection  for  ordinary  use  continues  to  be 
Collected  Diplomatic  Dociiments  Relating  to  the  Outbreak  of  the 
Europeayi  War  (1914),  a  publication  of  the  British  Government 
but  allowed,  even  by  hostile  critics,  to  contain  translations  of 
the  various  "  books"  and  "papers"  of  the  warring  governments 
which  are  accurate  and  fair;  E.  R.  O.  von  Mach,  Official  Diplo- 
matic Documents  Relating  to  the  Outbreak  of  the  European  War 
(1916),  which  contains  photographic  facsimiles  of  the  first 
and  most  important  collections  of  documents  in  the  original 
languages — the  footnotes,  which  caused  the  publishers  to  with- 
draw the  volume  from  circulation,  are  to  be  used  with  caution; 
J.  B.  Scott,  Diplomatic  Documents  Relating  to  the  Outbreak  of  the 
European  W^ar,  2  vols.  (1916),  a  larger  collection.  The  govern- 
ments of  the  Central  Powers  at  first  gave  little  information 
about  their  actions  in  these  days,  but  recently  some  very  full 
and  valuable  collections  of  documents  have  been  published, 
especially  for  Germany,  Die  Deutschen  Dokumente  zum  Kriegs- 
ausbruck,  ed.  by  Karl  Kautsky,  4  vols.  (1919);  and  for  Austria- 
Hungary,  Diplomatische  Aktenstiicke  zur  Vorgeschichte  des 
Krieges,  1914,  ed.  by  Dr.  Richard  Gooss,  3  vols.  (1919).  All 
these  documents,  together  with  much  subsidiary  material,  have 
been  analyzed  by  S.  B.  Fay,  "New  Light  on  the  Origins  of  the 
World  War,"  American  Historical  Review,  July,  October,  1920, 
January,  1921,  the  best  and  most  recent  account.  For  the 
diplomatic  negotiations  also  J.  W.  Headlam,  The  History  of 
Twelve  Days,  July  2Jfth  to  August  UK  19H  (1915);  M.  R.  Price, 
The  Diplomatic  History  of  the  War  (no  date,  ?  1914),  containing 
valuable  documents  but  much  vitiated  by  the  prejudice  of  the 
author;  E.  C.  Stowell,  The  Diplomacy  of  the  War  of  191  If  (1915). 
Attempted  explanations,  justifications,  or  condemnations:  E. 
P.  Barker  and  others,  Why  We  Are  at  War:  Great  Britain's  Case 
(1914);  Colonel  Bauer,  Konnien  Wir  den  Krieg  Vermeiden, 
Gewinnen,  Abbrechen?  (1919),  by  one  of  the  officers  of  Luden- 
dorff's  staff;  Harold  Begbie,  Vindication  of  Great  Britain  (1916); 
Sir  E.  Cook,  How  Britain  Strove  for  Peace  (1914);  Deutschland 
und  der  Weltkrieg  (1915),  by  several  authors,  trans,  by  W.  W. 
Whitelock,  Modern  Germany  in  Relation  to  the  Great  War  (1916); 
H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  The  War,  Its  Causes  and  Its  Issues  (1914);  Dr. 
Richard  Grelling,  J' Accuse:  von  einem  Deutschen  (1915),  Das 
Verbrechen,  translated  as  The' Crime  (1917-);  J.  W.  Headlam, 
The  German  Chancellor  and  the  Outbreak  of  War  (1917);  H.  F. 
Helmolt,    Die   Geheime    Vorgeschichte   des   Weltkrieges    (1914); 


CAUSES  OF  THE  GREAT  WAR  440 

Gottlieb  von  Jagow,  Ursachen  und  Ausbruch  des  Weltkrieges 
(1919) ;  Earl  Ix)reburn,  Ifow  the  War  Camc(\mO) ;  Ruiiisay  Muir, 
Britain  s  Case  Against  Germani/  (1914);  I'aiil  Rolirljacii,  Der 
Krieg  und  die  Deutsche  Politik  (1914),  trans,  by  1*.  II.  Pliillipson, 
Germany's  Isolation  (1914);  J.  II.  Ro.se,  The  Origins  of  the  IVar 
(1914);  T.  Schieraann,  Wie  England  eine  Verstandigung  mit 
Deidschland  Verhinderte  (1915). 

Belgium  and  Luxemburg:  Loui.s  Renault,  trans,  by  Frank 
Carr,  First  Violations  of  International  Law  by  Germany:  Luxem- 
bourg and  Belgium  (1917) ;  Charles  de  Visscher,  La  Belgique  et  les 
Juristes  Allemands  (191G),  trans,  by  E.  F.  Jourdain  (191G); 
George  Renwick,  Luxembourg  (1913). 


CHAPTER    XVII 
THE    GREAT    WAR 

Sunt  lacrimae  rerum  et  mentem  mortalia  tangunt. 
^neid,  i.  462. 

Ja  der  Krieg  verschlingt  die  Besten. 

Schiller,  "Das  Siegesfest"  (1803). 

.     .     .     the  poppies  blow 
Between  the  crosses,  row  on  row. 
That  mark  our  place;  and  in  the  sky 
The  larks,  still  bravely  singing,  fly. 
Scarce  heard  amid  the  guns  below. 

We  are  the  Dead.     Short  days  ago 
We  lived,  felt  dawn,  saw  sunset  glow, 
Loved  and  were  loved,  and  now  we  lie 
In  Flanders  fields. 

Lt.-Col.  John  McCrae,  "In  Flanders  Fields"  (1915). 

The  G     t  ^"^  Great  War,  as  it  has  been  called,  perhaps  for  want 

War  of  a  better  name,  began  August  1,  1914,  with  the  declara- 

tion of  war  by  the  German  Empire  against  Russia.  This 
was  followed  two  days  later  by  the  German  declaration 
against  France.  Next  day  came  the  declaration  of  Great 
Britain  against  Germany.  The  conflict  had  been  made 
nearly  inevitable  by  the  declaration  of  war  by  Austria- 
Hungary  against  Servia,  and  against  Austria  also  now 
the  Powers  of  the  Entente  soon  issued  declarations.  August 
23,  Japan  declared  war  upon  Germany  in  fulfilment,  as  she 
said,  of  the  terms  of  her  alliance  with  Britain.  By  the 
end  of  the  summer  all  Europe  with  the  exception  of 
Spain,  Holland,  the  Scandinavian  countries,  Italy,  and 
some  of  the  nations  of  the  Balkans,  the  outlying  and 

450 


THE    GREAT    AVAR 


451 


less  important  parts,  was  involved  in  llic  most  destructive 
conflict  in  the  history  of  the  world.  Relatively  more  ter- 
rible in  the  end,  were  the  death  struggle  between  Rome  and 
Carthage,  the  ravages  of  the  Huns  and  of  the  Mongols, 
the  Hundred  Years  War  in  France,  the  Thirty  Years  War 
in  Germany,  and  even  the  Napoleonic  wars;  but  these 
struggles  were  on  a  smaller  scale  or  else  produced  their 
fearful  results  because  they  continued  through  a  great 
many  years.  The  war  which  began  in  1914  lasted  little 
more  than  four  years,  but  in  that  short  time  it  brought  a 
great  part  of  the  civilized  world  to  the  brink  of  destruc- 
tion, and  because  of  the  enormous  numbers  engaged  and 
the  fearful  instruments  of  destruction  employed,  more 
men  were  killed  or  maimed,  it  is  said,  than  in  all  the  wars 
preceding,  since  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era. 

It  was  e\ident  to  all  at  the  beginning  of  the  struggle 
that  the  Germans  and  their  allies  had  great  advantage 
from  wonderful  preparation  and  from  striking  suddenly 
at  their  chosen  time,  but  it  was  widely  believed  that  if 
only  France  and  Russia  could  endure  the  assault  for  a 
short  period,  until  they  could  assemble  all  their  force, 
and  especially  until  Britain,  unprepared  for  the  war,  could 
bring  her  resources  to  bear,  that  the  Allies  of  the  Entente, 
because  they  had  the  greater  resources  in  wealth  and 
population,  had  the  better  chance  to  win — that  time  was 
on  their  side.  This  was  not  entirely  true.  It  is  certain 
that  the  Germans  expected  a  short  war,  for  they  had 
much  reason  to  anticipate  an  easy,  overwhelming  triumph. 
But  w^hen  their  first  rush  had  been  checked,  there  were 
periods  in  the  years  that  followed  when  their  advantages 
and  resources  were  so  superior  that  time  seemed  entirely 
with  them. 

The  Teutonic  powers,  especially  Germany,  possessed 
certain  advantages,  which  w^ere  understood  elsewhere 
more  clearly  as  the  conflict  progressed.  The  Germans 
had  the  largest  number  of  well-drilled,  thoroughly  trained, 


The  most 
destructive 
of  conflicts 


The  op- 
posing 
forces 


The  Ger- 
man army 


452 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
officers 


German 
commanders 


intelligent,  and  devoted  soldiers  possessed  by  any  power 
in  the  world.  France  had  as  brave  and  as  skilful  soldiers, 
but  not  so  great  a  population  and  not  so  large  an  army 
potentially  or  immediately  available.  Russia  had  great 
numbers  of  men,  but  scant  facilities  for  training  and 
equipping  them  as  soldiers.  Germany  could  put  into  the 
field  in  a  short  time  4,000,000  soldiers,  without  superiors 
in  the  world.  Military  tradition  and  years  of  training 
were  needed  to  make  such  fighting  men  as  hers,  and  having 
them  thus  ready  for  a  sudden  stroke,  it  was  extremely 
probable  that  her  army  could  conquer  any  combination, 
while  her  enemies  were  trying  to  create  forces  to  fight  her. 

If  it  required  two  or  three  years  to  make  well-trained 
soldiers,  it  took  much  longer  to  produce  capable  officers. 
Without  skilled  ofiicers  to  lead  the  men  no  great  war  can 
be  won,  and  without  a  large  force  of  reserve  oflBcers  no 
conflict  can  long  be  carried  on  with  any  success.  One 
reason  for  the  failure  of  the  Russian  armies  after  the  first 
year  was  that  then  most  of  the  trained  oflBcers  with  whom 
Russia  began  the  war  were  dead  or  in  German  prison 
camps.  In  1914  Germany,  of  all  the  powers,  had  the 
largest  number  of  trained  oflBcers,  and  by  far  the  largest 
number  of  officers  in  reserve. 

Much  more  difficult  than  the  getting  of  capable  officers 
or  well-trained  soldiers  was  the  building  up  of  general 
military  organization,  creating  a  general  staflF,  and  finding 
commanders  who  could  lead  large  numbers  of  men.  All 
the  Great  Powers  had  attempted  to  do  this,  and  some  of 
them  Hke  Russia,  and  especially  France,  had  achieved 
much  success.  But  in  Germany  the  prevalence  of  military 
atmosphere  and  the  long-continued  military  tradition 
and  devotion  to  the  science  of  war  had  given  the  largest 
number  of  higher  commanders  possessed  by  any  nation. 
In  the  end  it  was  seen  that  no  German  general  displayed 
that  sort  of  genius  which  entitled  him  to  be  remembered 
among  the  first  military  captains  of  the  world,  none  like 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


453 


the  great  Erencliman,  Focli;  ])ut  no  (jtlicr  i)()\vor  had  so 
many  leaders  of  corps  and  divisions  and  armies  who  had  all 
the  advantages  given  by  patient  study  of  military  things. 
In  this,  the  result  of  generations  of  work,  Germany  had 
something  which  none  of  her  enemies  could  create  in  a 
short  time  when  the  need  came. 

When  the  conflict  began  Germany  had  tlic  largest 
amount  of  military  equii)nient  in  the  world,  and  the 
greatest  facilities  for  immediately  adding  to  her  stock. 
Men  and  leaders  are  indispensable  for  winning  wars, 
but  the  bravest  soldiers  only  give  themselves  up  to  slaugh- 
ter if,  without  proper  weapons,  they  fight  against  enenu'es 
well  equipped.  Millions  of  Russians  were  to  fall  because 
the  Russian  armies  were  often  half  armed.  Modern  ar- 
maments are  very  different  from  those  of  earlier  times. 
In  the  Middle  Ages  weapons  were  comparatively  simj)le, 
easier  to  make,  and  less  expensive.  Man}-  a  man  had  his 
sword  or  bow  then,  and  armies  could  be  quickly  raised 
because  men  could  quickly  get  weapons  and  assemble  to- 
gether. But  the  scientific  and  industrial  development  of 
modern  times,  especially  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  introduced  many  strange,  complicated,  and 
costly  devices,  which  were  not  generally  in  the  possession 
of  the  men  of  the  commonwealth,  could  not  be  quickly 
made,  and  were  only  to  be  got  by  skilled  workmen  laboring 
for  a  long  time.  Rifles,  shells,  cannon,  explosives  often 
required  a  year  or  two  years  to  make.  When  the  United 
States  entered  the  war  later  on,  the  first  year  was  largel}' 
spent  in  preliminary  preparations  and  getting  the  delicate 
tools,  and  it  was  two  years  before  Great  Britain  was  able 
to  have  in  France  a  large  army  provided  with  rifles  and 
cannon.  Indeed,  the  great  service  of  France  was  to  be 
that  in  the  west  she  would  hold  Germany  back  while 
England,  and  later  America,  prepared  themselves  to  fight. 
In  the  east  Russia,  not  similarly  defended,  was  almost 
completely  destroyed  in  the  first  two  years.     It  is  clear 


Material 
for  war 


War 
material 
difficult 
to  obtain 


454 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Immense 

superiority 
of  the  nation 
possessing 
war 
materials 


Railroads 
in  war 


now  that  a  nation  provided  with  the  enormous  and  terrible 
death-dealing  de\aces  of  the  latest  age  can  probably  con- 
quer all  of  its  enemies  unprepared  before  they  have  time 
to  equip  themselves  with  the  implements  needed  for  de- 
fense. That  is  what  made  the  Great  War  such  a  critical 
period  in  the  history  of  civilization:  had  Germany 
triumphed,  she  might  have  conquered  all  her  rivals  and 
then  never  allowed  them  to  arm  themselves,  and  so  main- 
tained her  domination  for  ages.  At  all  events,  it  seems 
that  Germany  had  prepared  for  the  contest  so  thoroughly 
that  when  she  took  the  field  she  had  more  of  the  material 
of  war  than  existed  then  in  all  the  rest  of  the  world. 
Where  the  Russians  had  one  rifle  for  each  three  soldiers, 
she  had  three  rifles  for  each  soldier  of  hers.  In  heavy 
cannon  she  was  beyond  all  others,  and  she  had  accumu- 
lated shells,  barbed  wire,  and  military  apparatus  in  quan* 
titles  incredible  and  undreamed  of. 

Germany  had  the  best  system  of  military  railroads  in 
the  world.  Strategy  is  essentially  the  moving  of  armies. 
Napoleon  and  other  great  commanders  won  their  principal 
victories  by  swiftly  putting  superior  forces  where  they 
could  take  the  enemy  at  a  disadvantage — in  the  flank,  or 
across  his  communications  in  the  rear,  or  putting  two  or 
three  men  where  the  enemy  had  one.  Formerly  this  had 
been  done  by  the  marching  of  infantry,  as  quickly  as 
possible  over  the  best  roads.  But  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  by  which  time  the  best  land  com- 
munication was  over  railroads,  it  was  evident  that  rail- 
ways would  be  of  immense  importance  in  the  moving  of 
armies,  and  this  was  indeed  seen  to  be  the  case  in  the 
American  Civil  War  (1861-5).  Nowhere  was  this  lesson 
taken  to  heart  so  well  as  in  Germany,  where  more  and 
more  the  railroads  were  laid  out  with  respect  to  military 
considerations.  By  1914  there  was  a  magnificent  system, 
controlled  by  the  government  and,  when  necessary, 
completely  subject  to  the  military  authorities,  radiating 


THE    GREAT  WAR 


45; 


out  from  Berlin  1o  all  Ihc  irnporlaiit  f(jrl resscs  and  points 
near  the  frontiers,  while  just  within  the  boundaries,  some- 
thing like  the  rim  of  a  wheel,  ran  eonnecting  lines  along 
which  bodies  of  men  might  be  swiftly  moved  back  and 
forth.  Russia  and  France  had  their  military  railroad 
systems  also,  but  not  so  well-developerl  as  the  (Jerman. 
It  was  by  means  of  this  system  thai  (icniiaii\-  inuhvi  at 
Belgium  the  nn'ghty  army  which  so  nearly  cni^licd  France 
at  the  beginning  of  the  war.  Because  of  it  her  armies  in 
East  Prussia  were  repeatedly  able  to  disconcert  larger 
bodies  of  Russians  moving  more  slowly.  And,  because  of 
the  advantages  which  her  railroads  gave  her,  Gennany  was 
soon  able  to  take  from  France  and  Russia  the  best  of  their 
railroads  available  for  campaigns  against  her,  thus  [)aralyz- 
ing  them  almost  completely. 

Germany  had  at  the  beginning  of  the  war  the  most  ex- 
tensive system  of  spying  and  secret  propaganda  in  the 
world — though  all  the  great  nations  employed  these  de- 
vices, and  some  had  them  highly  developed.  In  Belgium 
the  work  of  the  armies  had  been  prei)ared  in  advance. 
Artillery  distances  had  been  very  accurately  measured, 
and  concrete  foundations  for  great  cannons  had  been  put 
under  tennis  courts  or  factory  buildings.  In  France, 
socialists  were  encouraged  to  prevent  or  confuse  mobiliza- 
tion. In  Egypt,  Morocco,  India,  and  Ireland  malcon- 
tents had  long  been  urged  and  were  now  encouraged  to 
rise  against  England  or  France.  In  Russia,  it  is  said, 
huge  bribes  were  offered  to  commanders  who  would  sell 
their  fortresses,  and  it  was  afterward  learned  that  most 
of  the  plans  of  the  Russian  annies  were  sold  by  traitors 
to  German  spies,  who  also  paid  bribes  to  keep  munitions 
from  being  dispatched  to  the  Russian  armies. 

The  Central  Powers  had  the  advantage  of  position. 
They  were  adjacent,  and  could  easily  act  together;  the 
Allies  were  separated,  and  for  a  long  time  acted  separately. 
The  Germans  had   the  central  position  and   tlie  "inner 


The  German 

railway 

system 


Spies 


Central 
position 


456 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The 

Entente  has 
command  of 
the  sea 


Superior 
resources 


lines,"  much  as  France  had  had  in  the  War  of  the  Spanish 
Succession.  The  Germans  could  move  over  short  lines 
and  strike  in  anj'  direction  quickly;  the  Allies  had  the 
longer  lines.  Roughly-  speaking,  the  Germans  could  move 
along  the  radii  of  a  circle,  the  Allies  had  to  move  around 
the  outside. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Allies  had  certain  advantages 
which  often  seemed  too  little  to  bring  them  success  against 
the  victories  of  the  German  armies,  but  which,  in  the  end, 
jaelded  complete  triumph.  Above  all,  they  had  command 
of  the  sea.  The  Allies  were  more  or  less  widely  separated. 
Their  essential  communications  with  one  another  lay  over 
the  water.  If  these  communications  were  ever  cut,  they 
could  certainly  be  beaten  one  after  the  other.  That 
period  of  the  war  which  seemed  most  hopeless  for  the 
Allies  was  when  German  submarines  threatened  to  sever 
their  lines  of  communications  on  the  water.  But  the 
Allies  always  kept  command  of  the  sea.  In  this  work  the 
vital  and  indispensable  factor  was  the  British  navy. 

The  Allies  had  greater  resources.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  war  it  looked  as  if  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary 
were  hopelessly  outmatched  in  population  and  resources 
of  materials  and  money.  Germany  was,  however,  ready 
for  a  sudden  stroke,  and  she  was  so  successful  at  the 
start,  that  by  the  end  of  the  first  year  she  had  taken 
possession  of  districts  in  Belgium,  France,  and  Russia 
which  were  of  immense  importance  for  the  carrying  on  of 
a  European  war,  and  which  gave  her  for  a  time  a 
decisive  advantage.  The  resources  she  then  had  under 
her  control  enabled  her  to  make  twice  as  much  steel 
and  hence  twice  as  much  armament  and  munition,  as  all 
her  opponents  combined.  In  1916  and  1917  many  of  the 
best  judges  thought  it  impossible  that  Germany  could  ever 
be  defeated.  All  this  was  changed  by  the  entrance  of  the 
United  States  into  the  conflict,  after  which  presently  the 
Allies  once  more  had  decisive  superiority  in  resources. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


4.57 


However  many  factors  may  have  entered  inlo  tJie  war, 
the  conflict  presently  assumed  the  charjieter  of  a  e(jnlest 
between  two  different  types  of  civilization  and  mind,  in 
which  the  democratic  systems  of  France,  Britain,  and 
America,  with  their  larj^e  allowance  of  personal  liberty 
and  individual  initiative,  were  matched  against  the  su- 
perbly organized  and  efficient  autocracy  of  the  German 
Empire.  In  the  end  it  was  found  that  the  democratic  peo- 
ples showed  greater  tenacity  of  purpose,  higher  intelli- 
gence, and  far  greater  power  of  adaptability  and  invention. 
Every  one  of  the  frightful  devices,  such  as  poison  gas  and 
submarines  used  against  merchant  ships,  was  met,  and 
checked,  and  in  the  end  excelled  by  new  devices  more 
effective  still. 

Such  were  German  methods  and  German  ideals  that  it 
seemed  to  the  Allies  that  a  German  victory  would  bring 
the  destruction  of  the  democratic  and  humanitarian 
systems  toward  which  men  had  so  long  been  striving.  The 
Allies  seemed  almost  hopelessly  defeated  after  two  years 
of  the  war,  but  always  the  cause  for  which  they  were 
struggling  nerved  them  to  hold  fast  and  fight  on  longer. 
Backward  Russia  was  the  only  one  of  the  Great  Powers  on 
the  Allied  side  to  drop  out.  It  seemed  to  the  Allies  that 
the  world  would  scarcely  be  a  fit  place  to  live  in  if  what 
the  Germans  had  done  was  sealed  with  success.  And 
always,  too,  they  were  supported  by  the  evident  sympathy 
of  most  of  the  neutral  peoples,  and  by  the  fact  that, 
one  after  the  other,  neutrals  were  joining  to  support 
their  cause.  The  Germans  had  no  such  moral  support  as 
this.  They  believed  their  cause  a  good  one,  but  in  a 
different  way.  They  were  strong  in  courage  and  con- 
fidence, in  the  midst  of  success,  but  when  the  war  began 
to  go  against  them  decisively,  they  did  not  persist  as 
France  had  done,  almost  against  all  hope,  but  collapsed 
completely  before  the  fighting  even  reached  their  frontiers. 

The  German  plan  of  campaigoi  had  been  arranged  long 


Initiative 
and 

inventive- 
ness 


Tenacity 
and  moral 
courage 


458 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  German 
plan  of 
campaign 


Entrance 
into  France 


before  1914.  The  armies  of  the  Empire  could  be 
mobiHzed  more  quickly  than  those  of  any  other  power, 
so  that  Germany  could  always  strike  before  any  of  her 
foes.  This  advantage,  joined  with  the  advantage  of  in- 
terior position,  enabled  her  to  strike  at  her  enemies  as  she 
chose,  and  attempt  to  destroy  them  separately.  She  had 
planned  to  crush  first  the  enemy  most  immediately  dan- 
gerous, and  afterward  turn  upon  those  who  could  not 
move  so  quickly,  and  destroy  them  also.  The  first  attack, 
then,  must  be  upon  France,  who  had  an  army  not  so  large 
as  the  German,  but  exceedingly  good,  and  who  could, 
perhaps,  mobilize  almost  as  rapidly  as  she.  Therefore, 
the  Germans  designed  to  make  an  immediate  and  terrible 
thrust,  hoping  that  France  would  be  crushed  in  less  than 
two  months,  after  which  would  come  the  turn  of  the 
Russians,  slow  moving  but  mighty,  who  would  in  any 
event  be  held  by  the  Austrians  while  France  was  meet- 
ing her  fate. 

But  for  the  success  of  this  plan  the  indispensable  condi- 
tion, it  was  thought,  was  that  France  should  be  over- 
whelmed without  any  delay;  and  it  would  not  be  easy  to 
do  this,  since  the  frontier  between  France  and  Germany 
was  short,  and  strongly  fortified  on  both  sides — on  the 
French  side  there  was  a  line  of  fortresses  from  Verdun 
do^Ti  to  Belfort,  just  as  across  the  frontier  on  the  German 
side  they  stretched  from  Strassburg  down  to  Neubreisach. 
Here  the  French  were  prepared  to  resist,  and  probably 
their  positions  could  be  forced  only  after  delay  and  enor- 
mous losses.  Accordingly,  for  some  years  it  had  seemed 
possible  that  when  Germany  next  attacked  France  her 
armies  would  march  through  the  valley  of  the  Meuse,  the 
best  of  all  entrances  into  France  from  Germany,  even 
though  this  line  of  march  lay  across  the  territory  of 
Belgium,  whose  neutralization  had  been  guaranteed  by  the 
German  Empire  along  with  the  other  Great  Powers.  If 
Germany  abided  by  her  word,  then  France  would  not  be 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


459 


attacked  by  way  of  Belgium;  but  if  the  Germans  con- 
sidered only  their  military  advantapo,  then  France  nn'ght 
be  attacked  either  from  Alsace-Lorraine  or  tlinjufi:h 
the  Meuse  Valley.  Unfortunately,  she  could  not  know 
whether  the  Germans  would  keep  their  enga<^ement.  In 
any  event,  however,  France  could  concentrate  at  the 
beginning  for  defence  only  about  half  as  many  troops  as 
Germany  could  use  in  the  thrust  against  her,  and  in  ac- 
cordance with  well-known  principles  of  strategy,  it  was 
wisest  for  her  to  keep  most  of  them  concentrated  in  one 
large  body.  So  the  French  determined  to  ignore  the 
possibility  of  an  attack  through  Belgium,  concentrate 
against  Alsace-Lorraine,  and  following  the  best  prin- 
ciples of  military  science,  take  the  offensive,  if  they  could. 
This  they  did,  in  the  earliest  days  of  the  war,  attacking 
through  the  Lost  Provinces,  and  gaining  some  slight  suc- 
cess. But  they  were  soon  repulsed  in  Alsace  and  badly 
defeated  in  Lorraine,  this  being  due  partly  to  misman- 
agement and  very  largely  to  German  superiority  in  ma- 
chine guns  and  heavy  artillery. 

The  Germans  were  merely  holding  their  lines  with  com- 
paratively small  forces  in  the  south.  It  was  soon  evident 
that  their  great  effort  was  to  be  through  Belgium,  straight 
at  the  heart  of  France.  August  4,  immediately  after  their 
demand  had  been  rejected,  they  poured  into  Belgium. 
Their  line  of  march  through  the  INIeuse  Valley  was  barred 
by  the  strong  fortresses  of  Liege  and  Namur,  with  Ant- 
werp, supposedly  impregnable,  threatening  their  flank 
from  the  north.  Against  the  avalanche  of  German  soldiers 
the  brave  little  Belgian  army  could  do  nothing  but  fight 
retarding  actions,  but  it  was  hoped  that  the  fortresses 
would  hold  until  assistance  came  from  England  and 
France.  The  Germans  were,  indeed,  checked  for  a 
moment  at  Liege,  but  immediately  they  revealed  to  the 
world  one  of  the  great  surprises  of  the  war.  Against 
Liege  they  quickly  brought  incredibly  large  cannon,  which 


Easy  en- 
trance into 
France  from 
Belgium 


Invasion  of 
Belgium  by 
the  Ger- 
mans 


460 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  British 

and  the 
French  de- 
feated in 
Belgium 


France  at 
the  brink  of 
destruction 


they  moved  easily,  on  great  broad  wheels,  up  to  positions 
prepared  by  secret  agents  in  advance;  and,  having  ready 
at  hand  the  exact  distances,  dropped  10-  and  12-inch 
shells  of  incredible  power  upon  the  forts,  reducing  the 
fortress  in  a  few  days.  Then,  bringing  up  their  monstrous 
42-centimeter  guns,  which  fired  16-inch  shells,  they  cap- 
tured Namur.  All  the  western  world  was  appalled  at  the 
news  that  this  fortress  had  fallen  in  one  day,  and  that  the 
way  into  France  was  open. 

Through  Belgium,  by  forced  marches,  came  such  an 
army  as  the  world  had  never  seen  before — gray-clad  sol- 
diers in  unending  stream,  equipped  to  the  last  detail;  and 
accompanied  by  the  most  fearful  engines  of  destruction. 
The  Belgian  army  was  flung  aside  upon  Antwerp,  which 
was  masked,  and  which  the  Germans  took  two  months 
later,  when  they  had  leisure  to  bring  up  their  heavy  cannon. 
Brussels  surrendered  without  resistance,  and  when  the 
campaign  was  over  it  was  found  that  all  of  Belgium,  ex- 
cept for  one  little  section  on  the  Channel,  adjoining  France, 
had  been  conquered  at  a  stroke.  The  British  and  the 
French  did  try  to  come  to  the  rescue,  but  they  could  not 
send  strong  forces  at  once,  and  those  which  they  sent 
came  too  late.  The  French  were  heavily  defeated  at 
Charleroi  and  the  British  at  Mons,  narrowly  escaping 
destruction  as  they  retreated  precipitately,  back  into 
France. 

For  France  the  situation  rapidly  became  almost  hope- 
less. Her  army,  smaller  than  the  German,  was  far  away, 
in  the  wrong  place.  Shifting  a  large  number  of  soldiers 
is  one  of  the  most  complicated  and  difiicult  tasks  in  the 
world;  and  it  was  very  doubtful  whether  the  French 
commanders  could  do  it,  with  the  Germans  rushing  down 
now  upon  Paris.  In  the  course  of  three  weeks,  almost 
by  a  miracle,  they  accomplished  the  maneuver,  but  by  the 
end  of  September,  when  this  had  been  done,  the  French 
armies  had  undergone  a  succession  of  disastrous  defeats 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


461 


and  everywhere  had  had  to  retreat  before  the  foe.  The 
French  Government  moved  from  Paris  to  Bordeaux,  and 
it  was  evident  that  one  of  the  great  crises  in  Europe's 
history  was  at  hand.  The  Germans  beHeved  that  they 
would  soon  have  the  French  army  cut  off  and  surrounded, 
and  would  soon  capture  Paris.  It  almost  seemed  that 
they  would  crush  France  in  six  weeks,  even  as  they  had 
boasted. 

The  French  people  did  not  despair,  'i'hey  rose  now  to  a 
height  of  grandeur  which  surprised  their  enemies  and  their 
friends,  something  that  had  before  happened  not  seldom 
in  the  history  of  France  The  frontier  fortresses  held 
from  Belfort  northward,  above  all  the  immensely  im- 
portant pivot  position  at  Verdun.  Between  Verdun  and 
the  huge  entrenched  camp  at  Paris  the  retreating  French 
armies  were  forced  back  until  their  line  bulged  far  down  in 
the  center  and  threatened  to  burst  asunder,  while  the 
Germans  under  Von  Kluck  threatened  to  outflank  the 
French  line  near  Paris.  September  5  the  matter  at 
last  came  to  issue.  German  horsemen  had  just  ridden 
into  the  outskirts  of  Paris,  but  Von  Kluck,  confronting  the 
fortress  of  Paris  and  a  French  army  not  yet  destroyed,  had 
turned  aside  from  the  capital,  and  thus  left  his  own  flank 
exposed.  Joffre,  commander  of  the  French,  unable  to 
stand  at  first,  had  retreated  steadily  to  positions  which  he 
considered  favorable  for  a  battle.  He  had  reached  them 
now,  just  when  the  French  could  go  back  no  farther.  "  The 
hour  has  come,"  he  said,  in  a  famous  order,  "to  hold  at 
all  costs  and  allow  oneself  to  be  slain  rather  than  give 
way.  .  .  .  Everything  depends  on  the  result  of  to- 
morrow." 

September  6  began  the  series  of  mortal  combats  ex- 
tending for  a  great  distance,  and  fought  between  1,500,000 
Germans  with  4,000  cannons  besides  their  heavy  guns, 
and  1,000,000  Frenchmen  with  a  small  but  excellent 
British  force.     From  the  river  that  flows  through  this 


Retreat  of 
the  French 
army 


The  Battle 
of  the  Marne 


462 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  French 
against  the 
Germans: 
wager  of 
battle 


Immense 
importance 
of  the  battle 


part  of  the  country  the  conflict  is  known  as  the  Battle  of 
the  Mame.  The  Germans  were  superior  in  numbers 
and  equipment  and  flushed  with  a  mighty  triumph.  The 
French  were  numerically  inferior  and  disheartened  by 
disaster.  But  the  Germans  were  now  wearied  from 
their  rapid  advance  and  far  from  their  base,  while  the 
French  were  close  to  their  own,  in  favorable  positions. 
For  four  days  the  great  battle  raged.  The  Germans 
fought  bravely  and  well,  but  the  French  soldiers,  with 
backs  to  the  wall,  with  everything  now  and  in  the  future  at 
stake,  rose  to  prodigies  of  valor.  Everywhere  the  strug- 
gle was  desperate  and  prolonged.  Generally  the  French 
line  held  at  all  points,  and  the  battle  was  decided  by  two 
great  German  reverses.  Near  Paris  their  line  was  de- 
feated after  a  terrible  combat,  they  were  nearly  out- 
flanked, and  saved  themselves  only  by  precipitate  retreat, 
at  times  almost  like  a  rout,  and  their  backward  movement 
gradually  compelled  other  German  armies  near  by  to  give 
ground  and  go  back  with  them.  Meanwhile,  in  the  center 
the  Germans  nearly  broke  through,  and  threatened  to 
cut  the  French  line,  but  General  Foch,  four  times  attacking 
them  in  turn,  and  four  times  defeated,  declared  that 
"the  situation  is  excellent,"  attacked  them  again,  com- 
pletely defeated  the  Prussian  Guard,  and  broke  through 
the  German  line.  By  September  10,  the  decision  had 
come;  and  by  the  middle  of  the  month  the  Germans  had 
retreated  from  a  large  part  of  the  conquests  they  had 
made,  Paris  was  safe,  and  the  French  army  was  saved. 

The  Battle  of  the  Marne  was  the  most  decisive  incident 
in  the  Great  War.  It  was  the  most  decisive  struggle 
in  the  history  of  Europe  since  the  Battle  of  Blen- 
heim (1704).  Had  the  Germans  won,  the  French  army 
would  almost  certainly  have  been  destroyed,  or  at  best 
driven  south  of  the  Loire,  leaving  Paris  and  all  north  and 
east  France,  including  the  principal  railways  and  indus- 
trial regions,  in  the  enemy's  hands,  completely  cutting  off 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


4G3 


what  remained  of  France  from  pood  connection  with  Eng- 
land, and  exposing  Enghmd,  unprepared,  to  nmch  more 
dangerous  menace  than  she  afterward  had  to  meet.  Most 
probably  the  Germans  could  then  have  held  their  lines  in 
the  west  with  few  troops,  turned  on  Russia  and  soon 
destroyed  her,  as  they  did  anyhow  somewhat  later,  then 
come  back  to  the  west,  completed  the  destruction  of 
France,  and  undertaken  the  conquest  of  England.  If 
England  and  the  British  fleet  had  passed  under  their  sway, 
no  other  nation  could  have  resisted  their  aggression;  and 
the  "world  power,"  which  Bernhardi  had  spoken  of,  might 
conceivably  have  been  theirs  for  a  great  while  to  come.  So 
great  was  the  military  strength  of  the  Germans  in  1914 
that  they  could  defeat  all  other  powers  if  those  powers 
were  not  given  time  to  prepare.  The  British  Empire  and 
the  United  States  could  defeat  the  Germans  later  on,  but 
not  without  some  years  to  raise  their  armies  and  equip 
them.  They  had  the  necessary  time  only  because  mean- 
while the  French  held  the  lines  in  the  west,  and  this  would 
have  been  impossible  except  for  triumph  on  the  ^Nlarne. 

Such  was  the  Battle  of  the  Marne,  in  larger  perspective. 
Actually,  at  the  time,  it  seemed  to  the  Germans  that  they 
had  been  merely  repulsed,  not  badly  defeated,  and  that 
later  on  they  would  return  and  then  not  fail.  Moreover, 
in  the  campaign  they  had  enormous  success.  After  their 
defeat  they  went  back  from  the  vicinity  of  Paris,  and 
evacuated  a  considerable  portion  of  France;  but  they 
halted  along  the  Aisne  River,  and  there  entrenching,  defied 
every  attack  of  the  Allies.  They  had  conquered  and  they 
held  behind  their  lines  the  richest  industrial  district  of 
France  and  the  principal  source  of  France's  supply  of 
coal  and  iron-ore.  No  longer,  except  for  outside  assist- 
ance, could  the  French  make  sufficient  munitions.  "\Mien, 
in  the  following  year,  in  the  east,  the  Germans  had  taken 
from  the  Russians  Poland  and  the  districts  near  by,  very 
similar  was  the  case  of  Russians,  and  by  the  autunm  of 


The  Ger- 
mans pre- 
vented from 
quickly 
winning  the 
war 


Great  suc- 
cess of  the 
Germans 


464 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Struggle  for 
the  Channel 
Ports : 
Dunkirk, 
Calais, 
Boulogne 


The  line  in 
the  east 


1915  the  Germans  seemed  to  have  definitely  won  the  war 
on  the  continent  of  Europe.  Russia  was  not  able  to  re- 
cover; but  France,  supplied  from  abroad  with  materials 
for  war,  continued  the  struggle.  This  was  possible  only 
because  of  the  work  of  the  British  navy. 

The  French  and  the  British  lacked  the  heavy  artillery 
and  the  shells  with  which  to  drive  the  Germans  back  from 
the  Aisne,  but  they  wisely  extended  their  own  lines  north- 
ward just  in  time  to  keep  the  Germans  from  occupying, 
as  they  might  easily  have  done,  the  Channel  ports,  espe- 
cially Calais  and  Dunkirk,  the  gateway  to  England.  All 
too  late  the  Germans  realized  the  supreme  importance 
of  these  places,  and  launched  a  series  of  mass  attacks 
upon  the  British  and  the  French  in  an  effort  to  break 
through  at  all  costs.  At  Ypres,  where  the  British  held 
against  terrible  odds,  and  along  the  Yser  River,  where  the 
British,  Belgians,  and  French  were  almost  annihilated 
but  held  out  until  the  country  was  flooded  and  warships 
with  long-range  guns  joined  in  the  defence,  the  Germans 
were  held  back  from  their  goal.  The  result  of  this  action 
was  almost  as  important  as  the  victory  of  the  Marne. 

So,  for  a  while,  in  the  west  the  great  movements  came  to 
an  end.  The  Germans  had  won  mighty  triumphs,  but 
they  had  failed  to  win  the  war  quickly.  Both  sides  now 
settled  down  in  long,  fortified  lines,  which  reached  from  Swit- 
zerland to  the  North  Sea,  which  left  to  the  French  a  small 
part  of  German  Alsace,  but  left  within  the  German  lines 
northeastern  France  and  almost  all  of  Belgium,  These 
lines  were  constantly  made  stronger  on  both  sides,  until 
at  last  it  seemed  impossible  that  they  could  ever  be  broken. 

Meanwhile,  great  things  had  been  happening  in  the  east. 
While  Germany  hurled  herself  upon  France,  she  left  her 
eastern  borders  nearly  unprotected,  believing  that  the 
Russians  could  not  immediately  do  much  damage,  and 
relying  on  the  Austrians,  meantime,  to  meet  them.  But 
the  Russians  surprised  their  enemies  by  the  speed  with 


26.    THE  ^"ESTERN  FRONT  IN  THE  GREAT  WMl 


465 


^<^;^ 


Riga' 


B   ^ 


<^  Memelb\ 


s,Dvinsk 


sber 


7^   }    ^ 


o  MiMk 


rarsaM@r      ^^Prest-Lit!fvsk^ 

Pi o  L  An  d Lj#-f'^^ 

U    °Lodz     ^olvangoWa 
V^\^  Kielce  /  Lublin  \ 


(/> 


\^ 


\ 


5    J  Lublin  \      Xt  iitct  rr-      S  >v 

^•^e  i /r"*^'^  oRovno  Kiev^ 

/^y\.W-'^(.j'  oDubno  ,^     \^e, 

'"—"'—  ^^       ■^??rody  ^^ 

;jTiysl  ^^Vnopol 


yienna     o^ 

_     Budapest 

N  IfG     i\ 


SCr^-^/;,    HaliczVII    pal* 

I 

R 


rnowitri 


Farthest  Russian  Advance  1914 
Battle  Line  in  December,  1917 


Scale  of  Miles 
100  200 


300 


GENERAL  DRAFTING  CO  INC. NY 


^^    ^^      t|Cf^rnowitz>      *^ 
At'  t    Jl'^  Ve'r^schi  Pass  ^ 

^s^ehas  Pass     ^aess? 
^^\    *^     \ 

Hermannstadt      ^  ;>•» 

Hpten  Turn)  ^Pass 

•     Pass  »^ 

^  R  JBu^arest 


27.  THE  EASTERN  FRONT  IN  THE  GREAT  WAR 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


467 


which  they  commenced  their  campaign.  The  Austrians 
did,  indeed,  begin  an  offensive  into  Russian  Pohuid,  hut 
they  were  at  once  met  by  the  advancing  Russian  arnn'e.s, 
and  thrown  back  in  disastrous  defeat.  After  a  series  of 
great  batth'S  the  Russians  overran  nearly  all  of  Gahciji, 
the  exposed  part  of  Austria-Hungary,  drove  on  the  Aus- 
trian armies  in  precipitate  rout,  and  captured  all  but  one 
of  the  Galician  fortresses.  Austria  had  utterly  failed  to 
check  the  Russians,  and  in  a  short  time  was  calling  for 
assistance  from  the  Germans. 

While  the  Austrians  were  being  driven  back  from 
Poland  another  Russian  army  invaded  Germany  itself. 
In  a  short  time  part  of  East  Prussia  had  been  crossed. 
At  once  a  strong  force  was  sent  across  Germany,  and  this 
army  under  Von  Hindenburg  caught  the  Russians  in  the 
region  of  the  IVIazurian  marshes  and  lakes,  and  there  at  the 
battle  of  Tannenberg  a  force  of  250,000  Russians  was  scat- 
tered or  destroyed.  Some  escaped,  many  thousands  were 
captured,  and  subsequently  paraded  in  triumph  through 
Berlin,  but  a  host  of  them  had  been  killed  by  the  great 
shells  or  smothered  in  the  marshes.  It  was  as  complete  a 
triumph  as  the  victory  of  Hannibal  over  the  Romans  at 
Cannae,  but  such  were  the  proportions  of  the  Great  War 
that  Tannenberg  was  merely  an  episode  in  the  struggle. 
East  Prussia  was  cleared  of  the  foe;  but  it  is  believed  that 
the  absence  from  the  west  front  of  the  German  soldiers 
who  did  this  had  some  connection  with  the  victory  of  the 
French  at  the  jMarne. 

In  1915  the  Germans,  holding  the  initiative  as  before, 
changed  their  general  plan.  They  had  intended  to  over- 
whelm France  and  then  destroy  Russia  at  their  leisure. 
In  this  they  had  failed.  They  now  determined  to  hold 
France  and  Britain,  standing  on  the  defensive  in  their  en- 
trenchments in  the  west,  and  turn  their  principal  effort 
to  destroying  the  Russians  completely.  During  the  winter 
of  1914-15  there  was  terrible  and  dreary  fighting  in  the 


The  Rus- 
sians de- 
feated in 
East  Prussia 


Struggle  in 
the  east, 
1914-15 


468 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Campaigns 
in  Poland 
and  Galicia 


The 
Dunajec 


east  as  the  Germans  came  to  the  aid  of  their  demoraUzed 
Austrian  aUies.  On  the  wintry  plains  of  Poland,  and 
farther  north  along  the  Russian  border,  great  battles  were 
fought,  until  presently  the  two  sides  settled  down  in  lines 
of  entrenchments  longer  but  less  strong  than  those  in  the 
west.  In  March,  the  Russians  took  the  great  fortress  of 
Przemysl,  the  last  stronghold  in  Galicia,  together  with  a 
huge  Austrian  army.  All  through  the  winter  they  had 
been  fighting  in  the  heights  of  the  Carpathian  Mountains 
for  possession  of  the  passes ;  now  they  had  all  but  the  most 
important  one  of  them,  and  threatened  to  pour  in  a  tor- 
rent down  into  Hungary.  They  were  also  near  to  the 
great  fortress  of  Cracow,  the  fall  of  which  might  open  the 
way  into  the  German  Empire. 

But  as  spring  began  the  Germans  and  Austrians  were 
ready  for  a  decisive  blow.  About  the  center  of  the  long, 
irregular  line,  not  far  from  Cracow,  an  immense  con- 
centration of  men  and  cannons  was  made.  May  2, 
after  a  fearful  bombardment,  the  like  of  which  had  never 
before  been  seen,  which  annihilated  the  Russians  and 
completely  obliterated  their  lines  for  a  space  of  some  miles, 
the  Teutonic  armies,  launching  a  great  attack,  broke 
completely  through  the  Russian  position.  The  only  hope 
was  rapid  retreat  until  the  parts  disunited  could  join. 
This  the  Russians  attempted,  and  on  the  whole  their  back- 
ward movement  was  well  carried  out;  it  never  turned  into 
rout,  nor  was  their  main  force  ever  surrounded  and  cap- 
tured. But  the  danger  was  very  terrible.  When  the 
break  through  occurred  at  the  Dunajec  River,  the  Russian 
forces  in  Galicia  and  in  the  Carpathians  were  in  imminent 
danger  of  being  cut  off;  and  while  they  were  being  pressed 
by  Teutonic  armies  under  Von  Mackensen,  farther  north 
they  were  being  attacked  by  the  German  armies  of  Von 
Hindenburg. 

So  began  a  great  and  disastrous  retreat.  The  Russians 
fled  from  the  Carpathian  Mountains;  they  quickly  aban- 


28.    THE  OCEANS  OF  THE  WORLD  — MERCATOR'i 

OF  COMMUNICATK 


lOJECTIOX:  SHOWING  TIIE  PRIXCIP^VL  SEA  LINES 
[N  THE  GREAT  WAR 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


469 


doned  nearly  all  of  Galicia  together  with  the  great  for- 
tresses which  they  had  captured  after  so  much  effort; 
and  at  the  same  time  they  were  retreating  back  through 
Poland,  fighting  bitter  rear-guard  actions,  but  never  really 
able  to  halt  the  pursuit.  The  outlying  Polish  fortresses 
were  taken;  then  Warsaw,  the  capital;  then  the  second-hne 
fortresses;  presently  Brest-Litovsk,  the  center  of  the  Rus- 
sian system  of  defence;  and  even  cities  and  strong  points 
beyond.  When  at  last  the  retreat  came  to  an  end  it  was 
found  that  the  Germans  had,  indeed,  fallen  short  of  entire 
success,  for  they  had  not  completely  destroyed  the  Rus- 
sian armies,  nor  had  they  put  Russia  utterly  out  of  the 
war.  But  it  was  afterward  seen  that  Russia  was  virtually 
eliminated  in  this  camj^aign.  A  vast  number  of  her 
soldiers  had  been  killed  or  disabled,  and  an  equally  great 
number  taken  prisoners  by  the  Germans.  JNIost  of  the 
trained  officers  with  whom  Russia  had  begun  the  war 
were  now  captive  or  dead.  Most  of  the  war  material  was 
worn  out  or  lost,  and  Russia  was  neither  an  industrial  na- 
tion capable  of  making  arms  and  ammunition  on  a  great 
scale,  nor  was  she  so  situated  that  she  could,  like  France, 
easily  procure  great  supplies  from  outside.  Moreover, 
her  railroads,  best  adapted  for  military  purpose,  were 
now  in  the  enemy's  hands.  Russia  did  continue  to  fight 
valiantly  for  a  time,  and  she  accomplished  some  great 
things  in  the  following  year;  but  as  we  see  it  now,  she  was 
definitively  defeated  in  the  campaign  that  began  on  the 
Dunajec. 

Thus,  in  the  course  of  little  more  than  a  year,  for  Brest- 
Litovsk  fell  in  August  and  Yilna  in  September,  1915, 
Germany  had  greatly,  though  not  completely,  succeeded 
in  the  west,  and  far  more  greatly  succeeded  in  the  east. 
In  the  autumn  she  turned  her  attention  to  the  south,  and 
soon  accomplished  the  task  for  which  she  had  begun  the 
war:  getting  control  of  the  Balkans.  The  hour  of  Servia 
had  come.     Thus  far  the  Serbs  had  been  able  to  defend 


Retreat  of 
the  Rus- 
sians 


The  Central 
Powers  get 
control  of 
the  Balkans 


470 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Servia 
conquered 


Gallipoli 


Allied  fleet 
at  the 

Dardanelles 


themselves.  Twice  had  the  Austrians,  occupied  as  they 
were  in  their  contest  with  Russia,  sent  expeditions  over 
the  Danube ;  twice  had  they  been  driven  back  in  shame- 
ful defeat  and  disaster.  But  now  a  third  invasion  was 
undertiiken  by  the  Germans,  at  a  time  when  Russia 
could  give  no  more  help,  and,  worse  still,  as  the  little 
country  was  struck  from  the  side  by  Bulgaria,  who  now 
entered  the  war  on  the  side  of  the  Central  Powers.  The 
exliausted  Serbs  were  ground  to  pieces  by  the  Teutons 
from  the  north  and  the  vengeful  Bulgarians  from  the 
east;  their  country  was  completely  subjugated;  and  only 
a  part  of  the  Servian  army,  and  a  few  of  the  people  escaped 
over  the  mountains,  in  a  horrible  retreat.  They  were 
taken  to  islands  off  the  coast  by  Allied  warships. 

Meanwhile,  the  Allies  had  suffered  a  great  defeat.  In 
November,  1914,  Turkey  had  entered  the  war  on  the  side 
of  Germany  and  Austria.  This  more  than  balanced  the 
decision  of  Italy  not  to  assist  the  Central  Powers,  for 
it  almost  completely  cut  off  Russia  from  her  western  part- 
ners, making  it  very  difficult  for  them  to  obtain  her  wheat, 
which  they  badly  needed,  and  just  as  hard  for  her  to 
obtain  from  them  the  war  supplies  without  which  she 
could  not  long  play  an  important  part.  Accordingly,  it 
was  of  the  greatest  importance  that  communications  be 
opened  up  again  by  forcing  the  Dardanelles  and  after- 
ward taking  Constantinople.  Moreover,  this  would  not 
only  assist  Russia,  but  it  would  be  a  momentous  success  in 
itself,  and  bring  to  an  end,  perhaps,  the  German  dream  of 
mastery  in  the  Balkans  and  Asiatic  Turkey.  Therefore, 
in  February,  1915,  British  and  French  warships  attempted 
to  force  the  strait  of  the  Dardanelles.  After  severe 
losses  they  desisted,  though  it  is  said  that  victory  was 
within  reach  if  they  had  attacked  again  the  next  day.  A 
great  expedition  was  now  sent  out  to  take  the  positions 
which  guarded  the  entrance,  and  in  April  a  landing  was 
effected  on  the  Gallipoli  Peninsula. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


471 


In  all  the  war  there  was  no  more  glorious  and  disastrous 
enterprise  than  this  attempt  to  scale  the  barren,  roeky 
mountains  which  guarded  the  strait.  Even  drinking 
water  had  to  be  brought  from  a  long  distance,  and  numbers 
went  insane  from  thirst.  Many  a  heroic  attempt  was 
made,  and   the   fighting  went  on  all  through   the  time 


Successful 
defense  by 
the  Turks 


«I5>    Bntnh  Lindlng 

♦    Fofts 
Road! 


29.     GALLIPOLI 


when  the  Russians  were  being  defeated  far  to  the  north. 
One  day  Allied  soldiers  won  to  the  top  and  saw  the  blue 
waters  of  IMarmora  in  the  distance;  but  they  were  soon 
driven  back.  The  Turks  fought  with  stubborn  courage 
until  the  Germans,  having  put  Russia  out  of  the  way  and 
destroyed  Servia,  were  coming  to  relieve  them.  Then 
Gallipoli  was  evacuated,  and  the  attempt  ended  in  com- 


The  Allies 
fail 


472 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Position  of 
the  Teu- 
tonic powers 


The  Allies 
keep  control 
of  the  sea 


plete  failure.  The  troops  thus  withdrawn  were  taken  to 
the  Greek  city  of  Salonica,  the  most  important  position 
on  the  ^gean,  to  which  they  had  been  invited  by  the 
Greek  Government,  though  the  invitation  was  withdrawn 
by  the  Greek  king.  There  they  constituted  a  potential 
threat  against  Bulgaria  and  Turkey,  though  for  a  long 
time  they  had  to  remain  inactive,  and  accomplished  vir- 
tually nothing. 

On  land  now  the  Germans  seemed  to  have  won  the 
contest  completely.  They  had  obtained  what  they  began 
the  war  for,  and  they  had  conquered  much  besides.  If 
they  could  only  hold  what  they  had  seized,  they  would 
come  out  of  the  struggle  incomparably  the  greatest  power 
in  the  world.  Accordingly,  they  chose  this  moment  to 
let  it  be  known  that  they  would  listen  to  proposals  for 
peace.  But  however  great  the  disasters  that  had  come 
to  the  Allies  thus  far,  the  consequences  of  such  a  peace 
as  Germany  would  be  willing  to  make  seemed  too  terrible, 
and  the  German  suggestions  were  not  even  considered. 
Besides,  it  still  seemed  to  many  that  the  future  lay  with 
the  Allies;  that  they  had  been  taken  unprepared,  and  that 
soon  they  would  be  able  to  fight  on  equal  terms,  and  get 
the  victory  shortly  thereafter. 

One  great  success  they  had  obtained:  Germany's  ship- 
ping had  been  swept  from  the  seas.  All  her  commerce 
had  vanished;  and  her  warships  stayed  close  to  the  forti- 
fications of  Helgoland  and  the  Kiel  Canal.  German 
submarines  did  some  execution  against  British  warships 
at  first,  but  this  soon  came  to  an  end.  German  cruisers 
made  daring  raids,  but  only  for  a  while.  At  first  much 
damage  was  done  to  Allied  shipping  by  German  raiders, 
but  one  by  one  they  were  hunted  down,  and  this  also  came 
to  an  end.  In  November,  1914,  in  the  Far  East,  the  Ger- 
man naval  base  of  Tsingtao  (Kiao-chau)  had  been  taken 
by  the  Japanese.  A  German  fleet  did  destroy  an  inferior 
British  fleet  off  the  coast  of  Chile,  but  shortly  after  it  was 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


473 


completely  destroyed  by  a  superior  British  force  off  the 
Falkland  Islands.  Meanwhile,  the  British  and  the  French 
fleets  had  entire  control  of  the  oceans,  over  which  their 
commerce  flowed  in  unceasing  stream. 

There  was  but  one  great  battle  on  the  sea.  May  31,1910, 
the  German  High  Seas  Fleet  cruising  off  the  coast  of  Den- 
mark was  overtaken  by  a  part  of  the  British  Grand  Fleet. 
The  powerful  but  lightly  armored  British  battle  cruisers  en- 
gaged the  enemy,  hoping  to  hold  him  until  the  remainder 
of  the  British  fleet  arrived.  The  Germans  fought  with 
great  skill  and  superior  speed  and  equipment,  and  in- 
flicted losses.  As  the  rest  of  the  British  ships  arrived  the 
German  fleet  withdrew,  and  in  the  failing  light  of  the  even- 
ing, behind  a  screen  of  submarines  and  destroyers,  it  made 
good  its  escape.  It  had  done  more  damage  than  it  suf- 
fered, and  the  German  Government  proclaimed  a  great 
victory  won.  After  a  few  days,  however,  it  was  seen  that 
the  action  was  essentially  a  British  victory,  for  Britain's 
hold  on  the  seas  continued  unshaken.  The  German 
battleships  had  withdrawn  to  their  haven,  and  the  spirit 
of  the  crews  declined.  They  did  not  again  come  forth 
to  fight  for  control  of  the  waters.  When  they  next  came 
out  it  was  in  ignominious  surrender. 

The  French  fleet  and  later  the  Italian  fleet  in  the  Medi- 
terranean, and  in  the  latter  part  of  the  war  the  powerful 
American  fleet,  contributed  materially  in  maintaining  the 
Allied  mastery  of  the  seas.  But  this  command  of  the 
waters  was  kept  primarily  by  the  warships  of  the  British 
Empire.  Since  there  was  only  one  great  naval  battle 
during  these  years,  there  was  little  of  the  spectacular 
about  the  Grand  Fleet's  service,  and  the  importance  of 
what  it  did  may  easily  be  overlooked.  Silently,  and 
with  not  much  said  about  what  was  being  done,  in  the  fair 
weather  of  sunmier  and  in  the  storms  and  sleet  and  cold 
of  the  North  Sea  winters,  unfaltering  and  with  vigilance 
unceasing,  the  prolonged  watch  was  kept.     Always  there 


The  Battle 
of  Jutland, 
1916 


The  British 
Grand  Fleet 


474 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


All-import- 
ant work  of 
the  British 
Navy 


Slow  prog- 
ress of  the 
Allies  on 
land 


was  danger  from  the  mines  which  Germans  strewed  in  the 
sea;  always  the  submarines  were  lurking  to  send  in  their 
deadly  torpedoes.  There  was  the  blockade  to  maintain, 
by  which  Germany  was  slowly  weakened  and  reduced; 
there  was  the  all-important  line  of  communication  across 
to  France  to  be  kept  open;  there  were  the  sea-routes  to 
be  kept  safe  between  the  parts  of  the  widely  scattered 
Empire  and  with  the  other  countries  from  which  came 
indispensable  supplies;  the  German  warships  were  to  be 
watched  lest  they  raid  the  coasts  of  England,  or  lest  some 
of  them  dash  out  into  the  open  sea  to  prey  upon  Allied 
commerce;  and  above  all  the  High  Seas  Fleet  of  the  Ger- 
man Empire  was  to  be  waited  for  and  met  if  ever  it  dared 
to  come  forth.  And  on  this  faithful  watch  and  ward  the 
whole  AHied  cause  depended.  If  ever  the  Grand  Fleet 
were  destroyed  or  beaten,  in  a  short  time  the  British  Em- 
pire would  be  starved  into  complete  surrender,  and  then 
triumphant  Germany  could  dictate  to  the  rest  of  the  world 
such  conditions  as  pleased  her.  Now  that  the  Great  War 
is  over,  the  work  of  the  British  seamen  stands  out  in  its  true 
proportions  and  grandeur. 

It  had  been  supposed  that  sea  power  would  finally  be 
decisive,  and  so  it  proved  in  the  end.  But  for  some  time 
it  seemed  that  Germany  had  won  such  mighty  victories 
on  land  that  she  could  win  the  war  in  spite  of  the  naval 
superiority  of  the  Allies.  It  was  evident  that  the  Central 
Powers  could  not  be  starved  into  submission  by  the  block- 
ade, but  must  be  beaten  also  on  land.  At  first  it  was 
hoped  that  this  could  be  done  when  the  powers  of  the 
Entente  were  more  fully  prepared.  Britain  was  arming 
and  would  presently  be  ready,  and  in  May,  1915,  Italy, 
partly  through  real  sympathy  with  the  Western  Powers 
and  horror  at  German  methods,  and  partly  through  desire 
of  getting  from  Austria-Hungary  Italia  Irredenta  and 
stronger  position  on  the  Adriatic,  declared  war  on  the 
Dual  Monarchy.     But  Italy  was  at  once  halted  by  the 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


475 


terrible  obstacle  of  the  Alps  aiul  made  scarcely  any  prog- 
ress, and  it  required  more  tiian  a  year  for  Britain  to  put 
a  great  army  in  France.  So,  in  1915,  while  Russia  was 
being  defeated  and  Servia  destroyed,  the  Allies  ac- 
complished almost  nothing  in  the  west.  The  British  made 
some  little  progress  at  Neuve  Chapelle,  but  inunediately 
the  Germans,  using  for  the  first  time  their  horrible  poison 
gas,  attacked  nearby  at  Ypres,  and  nearly  broke  through 
to  the  ports  of  the  Channel.  That  they  failed  to  do  this 
was  because  the  Canadians,  who  had  thrown  themselves 
heart  and  soul  into  the  struggle  along  with  Great  Britain, 
closed  up  the  gap  and  held  the  line.  In  September,  the 
French  attacking  in  the  Champagne  after  tremendous 
artillery  preparation,  tried  to  break  the  German  lines  as 
the  Germans  had  broken  the  Russian,  but  after  some  suc- 
cess in  the  beginning  they  were  brought  to  a  halt  with 
nothing  of  importance  accomplished.  In  all  respects  1915 
was  a  year  of  Allied  failure  and  German  success. 

Slow  as  it  seemed,  Britain  was  really  assembling  a  great 
army  in  northern  France,  well  drilled  and  fully  equipped. 
Some  time  in  1916  she  would  be  ready  for  her  first  great 
effort.  Again,  so  well  was  she  organized  and  prepared, 
Germany  was  ready  to  take  the  initiative  and  deal  the 
first  stroke.  Having  disposed  of  Russia  she  resolved  to 
make  a  second  thrust  at  France,  and  possibly  destroy  her 
before  England  could  throw  in  her  might.  Therefore, 
near  to  the  key  fortress  of  Verdun,  very  secretly  an 
enormous  concentration  of  artillery  was  made,  and  sud- 
denly, toward  the  end  of  February,  1916,  a  terrible  bom- 
bardment was  begun  from  thousands  of  cannon.  This 
was  followed  by  an  attack  which  at  once  carried  all  the 
environs  of  the  fortress  on  the  side  assaulted.  So  quickly 
was  this  accomplished  that  it  seemed  for  a  moment  that 
the  Germans  would  take  Verdun  just  as  they  had  taken 
Antwerp  and  Warsaw.  Indeed  the  railroad  communica- 
tions with  the  fortress  were  now  largely  cut,  and  there 


The  Italians 
halted  by 
the  Alps 


Verdun, 
1916 


476 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  French 
in  mortal 
danger 


The  Battle 
of  the 
Somme, 
1916 


was  no  small  danger  that  a  French  army  with  all  its  stores 
and  cannon  might  be  trapped  there.  It  is  said  that  the 
French  military  authorities  had  resolved  to  abandon 
the  position,  but  for  sentimental  reasons  it  was  finally 
decided  to  hold  on.  Supplies  were  brought  in  by  a 
wonderful  system  of  motor  transport,  hastily  arranged, 
and  the  new  German  methods  of  attack  were  countered 
by  new  methods  of  defence.  The  Germans  came  on  with 
the  utmost  bravery,  but  were  met  with  an  unconquerable 
courage.  "They  shall  not  pass!"  was  the  cry;  and  so  it 
was.  Other  strong  positions  were  taken,  but  the  German 
progress  now  was  very  slow.  Month  after  month,  through 
the  spring  and  into  the  summer,  the  fighting  went  on. 
There  were  savage  struggles  in  underground  passages,  and 
scenes  of  slaughter  too  horrible  to  describe.  Every  little 
hill  in  the  neighborhood  was  fought  over  and  soaked  with 
blood.  More  than  half  a  million  Germans  were  killed 
and  wounded,  and  the  number  of  Frenchmen  was  perhaps 
not  much  less.  In  July,  the  Germans  were  forced  to 
slacken  their  efforts  because  of  danger  threatening  else- 
where. Later  on,  after  superb  artillery  preparation,  the 
French  retook  in  two  days  all  the  important  positions  for 
which  the  Germans  had  struggled  so  long.  The  attack  on 
Verdun  resulted  in  a  great  German  failure. 

The  Germans  had  been  forced  to  desist  because  at  last 
the  British  were  about  ready,  to  the  north.  July  1,  the 
British  and  the  French,  making  the  kind  of  artillery 
preparation  that  now  preceded  all  great  attacks,  began 
an  offensive  to  break  through  the  German  lines.  For 
days  the  bombardment  continued,  and  the  distant  thunder 
of  the  cannons  could  be  heard  over  the  Channel,  in  Eng- 
land. The  attack  was  in  the  region  of  the  River  Somme, 
and  was  directed  at  the  towns  of  Bapaume  and  Peronne, 
and  the  more  important  centers  of  St.  Quentin,  Cambrai, 
and  Laon  behind  them.  If  these  places  were  taken,  most 
probably  the  Germans  would  have  to  retreat  out  of  France. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


477 


The  German  j)o.siti()iis  were  immensely  .siron<^.  Tliere 
were  many  little  trenches  and  strong  little  forts  for  ma- 
chine gunners,  protected  in  front  by  tangles  of  thick  harhed 
wire.  Behind  them  were  deep  underground  places  of 
refuge,  extending  down  several  stories,  in  which  armies 
could  be  sheltered  while  the  great  shells  were  falling.  Un- 
less these  defences  were  largely  obliterated  beforehand,  the 
attacking  infantry  would  be  mown  down  by  machine 
guns  as  they  came  forward.  AYhen  the  infantry  did 
advance,  the  French  at  once  reached  the  outskirts  of 
Peronne,  but  the  British,  more  strongly  opposed,  made  al- 
most no  progress.  Thereafter,  all  through  the  summer, 
the  armies  were  locked  in  a  death  struggle,  the  Allies 
slowly  advancing  a  little,  but  suffering  fearful  losses,  and 
the  Germans  losing  almost  as  many.  The  autumn  rains 
and  the  deep  mud  put  an  end  to  the  offensive,  and  it 
seemed  that  the  Allies  had  gained  almost  nothing.  They 
had  taken  no  important  town,  and  the  German  lines  were 
nowhere  broken.  But  actually  the  Germans  did  make  a 
considerable  retreat  in  the  following  spring,  and  they  now 
knew  that  England  and  France  were  not  ready  to  aban- 
don the  contest  because  of  discouragement  at  German 
victories,  but  that  a  terrible  struggle  must  continue,  wear- 
ing down  the  strength  of  both  sides,  until  one  or  the  other 
gave  up  through  exhaustion. 

During  the  course  of  this  summer  the  hopes  of  the 
Allies  ran  high  for  a  time.  In  May,  the  Austrians  began 
an  attack  upon  the  Italians  from  the  Trentino,  but  after 
some  success  were  forced  to  desist;  and  later  the  Italians 
captured  Gorizia,  and  made  great  progress  through  the 
mountain  barrier  and  on  the  way  to  Trieste.  The  Aus- 
trians had  drawn  back  because  in  June  the  Russians 
under  General  Brusilov,  making  their  last  great  effort, 
completely  shattered  the  Austrian  lines  in  the  east,  took 
a  huge  number  of  captives,  and  pressed  on  so  far  that 
only  strong  German  assistance,  at  a  time  when  it  was  diffi- 


Strength  of 
the  German 
position 


Germany 
at  bay,  1916 


478 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  last 
great 
Russian 
offensive 


A  contest  of 
exhaustion 


The  Ger- 
man sub- 
marines 


cult  for  Germany  to  detach  any  troops,  saved  the  Aus- 
trians  from  destruction.  The  Russians  were  finally 
halted,  but  the  position  of  the  Central  Powers  now  seemed 
so  dangerous  that  in  the  last  days  of  August  Rumania 
joined  the  Allies.  The  position  of  Germany,  however,  was 
still  enormously  strong.  The  Somme  offensive  was  soon 
to  come  to  an  end,  and  the  Russians  had  not  only  ex- 
hausted their  strength,  but  were  now  a  prey  to  traitors  and 
revolutionists,  and  were  soon  to  drop  out  of  the  war.  Ac- 
cordingly, Rumania,  attacked  from  the  side  of  Bulgaria 
and  from  the  north  by  a  powerful  German  army,  was 
mostly  overrun,  and  crushed  almost  as  completely  as 
Servia  had  been  the  year  before.  So,  for  the  Allies,  the 
campaign  of  1916  ended  as  darkly  as  that  of  the  previous 
year. 

The  war  had  for  some  time  resolved  itself  into  a  dead- 
lock between  Germany,  flushed  with  success  and  gorged 
with  conquests,  and  the  Allies  hoping  to  defeat  her  and 
wrest  from  her  what  she  had  taken.  It  was  evidently  to 
be  a  contest  of  resources,  a  contest  in  which  time  and  attri- 
tion would  make  the  weaker  succumb.  The  best  judges 
now  thought  that  Germany  could  never  be  defeated  by 
England  and  France,  without  further  aid,  and  that  at 
best  the  fighting  must  end  in  a  draw.  But  the  Germans 
had  undertaken  to  win  thoroughly  and  quickly  by  means 
of  another  device.  With  it,  they  came  near  to  success,  but 
in  the  end  it  brought  their  own  ruin. 

They  undertook  to  cut  the  communications  of  the  Allies 
and  starve  England  out  by  sinking  all  Allied  ships  by 
means  of  submarines.  The  communications  of  the  Ger- 
mans were  on  land.  If  ever  they  were  cut,  as  they  were 
about  to  be  when  hostilities  ceased,  Germany  would  be  de- 
feated. The  most  vital  communications  of  the  Allies  were 
by  sea.  France  depended  on  Great  Britain,  and  the  British 
people  could  not  continue  the  struggle,  nay,  they  could  only 
feed  themselves  a  few  weeks,  when  they  were  no  longer  able 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


479 


to  hririK  over  the  seas  their  food  and  their  raw  materials. 
Had  the  Germans  ever  been  able  to  defeat  the  IJritisli 
fleet,  they  would  have  quickly  won,  and  won  completely; 
but  this  they  were  never  able  to  do.  The  British  (J rand 
Fleet  kept  undisputed  conunand  of  the  surface  of  the  seas. 
Early  in  1915,  however,  the  Germans  began  using  their 
submarines  not  only  to  sink  warships,  which  was  legiti- 
mate, but  to  destroy  unarmed  vessels  as  well;  and  in  May 
of  that  year  the  giant  liner  Lusitanki  was  sunk  and 
great  numbers  of  passengers,  including  many  Americans, 
drowned.  The  Germans  maintained  that  since  the  British 
were  trying  by  the  blockade  to  starve  them,  especially 
their  women  and  children,  and  so  trying  to  force  them  to 
submit,  it  was  very  proper  for  them  to  retaliate,  and  try 
to  blockade  England  with  their  submarines,  starve  her  into 
submission,  and  so  end  a  hideous  conflict. 

This  contention  was  accepted  by  few  outside  of  Ger- 
many, since  in  accordance  with  past  usage  it  was  per- 
fectly proper  for  Britain,  in  command  of  the  seas,  to 
blockade  Germany,  as  it  would  have  been  for  Germany  to 
cut  off  England  if  her  warships  had  got  command  of  the 
seas.  On  the  other  hand,  it  had  gradually  come  to  be  one 
of  the  fundamental  maxims  of  procedure  at  sea  that  no 
ship  should  be  sunk  without  saving  the  crew,  in  case  they 
were  wilHng  to  surrender;  and  it  was  soon  seen  that  usually 
submarines  sank  ships  without  warning,  and  that  they 
could  not,  because  of  their  small  size,  save  the  crews  if 
they  would.  Germans  declared  that  the  submarine  was 
a  new  weapon,  and  that  new  rules  were  applicable  to  it; 
but  all  over  the  world  public  sentiment  ran  strongly 
against  the  use  of  a  weapon  which  could  not  from  its  nature 
be  used  in  accordance  with  primary  principles  of  humanity 
and  mercy. 

None  the  less,  the  Germans  used  this  device  increasingly, 
hampered  somewhat  by  the  protests  of  neutrals  and  some- 
what more  by  various  devices  which  the  Allied  navies 


The  British 
dependent 
upon  sea- 
borne traflBc 


Sinking  of 

merchant 

ships 


480 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Unrestricted 
submarine 
warfare, 
1917 


A  year  of 
disaster, 
1917 


employed.  But  they  paid  little  attention  to  the  one  and 
largely  avoided  the  other,  and  presently  the  menace  be- 
came very  grave.  Great  Britain  went  into  the  conflict 
with  enormous  shipping  tonnage,  but  month  after  month 
vessels  carrying  supplies  were  sunk  by  submarines  until 
not  only  the  great  loss  of  money  and  materials  was  felt 
severely,  but  presently  it  was  necessary  to  restrict  im- 
ports, since  the  war  greatly  increased  the  demands  upon 
her  merchant  marine  at  the  same  time  that  the  under- 
sea boats  were  sinking  so  many  ships.  Germany  still 
hesitated  to  put  forth  her  full  effort  in  this  manner,  but 
by  the  end  of  1916,  when  the  strain  of  the  contest  had 
begun  to  tell  terribly  on  both  sides,  it  was  evident  that 
if  the  sinking  of  Allied  vessels  continued  at  the  rate 
then  prevailing.  Great  Britain  must  after  some  time  be 
forced  out  of  the  war,  and  that  if  the  rate  of  destruction 
could  be  largely  increased,  the  end  might  come  quickly. 
The  principal  obstacle  was  that  the  people  and  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  were  strongly  opposed,  and 
might  conceivably  be  brought  into  the  war  against  Ger- 
many. After  much  hesitation  the  choice  was  made,  and 
January  31,  1917,  the  Imperial  Government  announced 
that  it  would  begin  unrestricted  submarine  warfare.  The 
German  people  believed  that  Britain  would  be  starved 
within  a  few  months. 

This  year,  1917,  was  a  year  of  disaster  and  despair  for 
the  Allies.  At  no  time  did  the  cause  of  the  Allies  and  of 
the  democratic  civilization  of  the  West  seem  so  dark.  When 
the  weather  permitted,  the  British  and  the  French  began 
another  offensive,  to  try  again  to  break  through  the  Ger- 
man lines.  The  Allies  were  hampered  by  the  German 
retreat  which  had  left  an  area  of  terrible  desolation  over 
which  an  attack  could  not  well  be  made;  but  in  April  the 
British  took  the  immensely  strong  position  of  Vimy,  and 
in  June,  with  a  huge  explosive  charge,  they  blew  up 
the  supposedly  impregnable  position  of  Messines  Ridge. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


481 


Farther  north  they  desperately  strove  to  break  down  into 
the  plain  of  Fhinders  and  compel  the  evacuation  of  the 
seaports  of  Belgium,  whence  the  submarines  constantly 
issued.  Several  times  they  seemed  to  haw  <,'()od  chance 
of  success;  but  they  fought  with  a  fatal  ill-fortune,  and 
when  the  season  came  to  an  end  they  had  endured  fearful 
losses,  some  800,000  men,  and  taken  from  the  Germans 
nothing  that  compelled  an  important  retreat.  During 
the  summer  the  French  made  another  effort  to  shatter 
the  German  lines.  Near  Laon  they  broke  through  the 
Chemin  des  Dames-  positions,  and  gained  a  brilliant  local 
victory,  but  because  of  terrible  losses,  gave  up  the  effort 
before  anything  decisive  was  accomplished.  Later  events 
were  to  show  that  this  was  the  last  great  offensive  effort 
the  French  could  make  by  themselves.  They  had  long 
borne  the  brunt  of  the  fighting,  and  their  losses  had  been 
so  appalling  that  they  were  now  almost  at  the  point  of 
despair.  That  they  did  not  falter  and  accept  a  German 
peace,  which  some  tried  to  persuade  them  to  accept,  was 
due  to  the  efforts  of  their  great  man,  Clemenceau,  and  most 
of  all  to  their  ow^n  unconquerable  spirit. 

If  there  was  in  this  year  doleful  lack  of  success  in  the 
west,  there  was  absolute  downfall  in  the  east.  Russia 
now  dropped  out  of  the  war.  The  Russians  had  fought 
almost  as  long  as  they  could.  A  great  agricultural  state, 
with  comparatively  few  railroads  and  scanty  industrial 
development,  its  people,  however  brave,  were  not  able 
unaided  to  carry  on  for  a  long  time  a  great  modern  war. 
The  Russian  soldiers  fought  with  a  courage  that  should 
be  for  a  long  time  remembered.  At  first  they  won  im- 
portant victories,  and,  it  may  be,  saved  the  Allied  cause; 
but  presently  their  trained  officers  were  mostly  gone  and 
they  had  no  reserve,  while,  worst  of  all,  most  of  their  equip- 
ment was  lost  or  worn  out,  and  they  could  no  longer  get 
enough  of  the  machine  guns  and  wire  and  cannon  and  shells, 
without  which  no  campaign  can  now  be  waged.     Their 


The  British 
fail 


The  French 
exhausted 


The  collapse 
of  Russia 


482 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Heroic 
efforts  of 
the  Russian 
soldiers 


The  Treaty 
of  Brest- 
Litovsk, 
1918 


government  was  inefficient  and  corrupt,  and  constantly 
military  plans  were  betrayed  to  the  German  spies.  And 
yet,  the  Russians  fought  on  beyond  expectation.  Again 
and  again  the  simple  peasants  laid  down  their  lives  in 
hopeless  attacks.  Without  artillery  preparation  they 
went  forth  against  the  enemy  lines,  torn  by  heavy  shells 
from  a  distance,  shattered  by  the  light  artillery  as  they 
came  nearer,  riddled  by  machine-gun  fire  nearer  at  hand, 
and  played  upon  with  liquid  fire  as  they  attacked  the  en- 
trenchments. Meanwhile,  the  entire  industrial  and  eco- 
nomic life  of  the  country  was  disorganized.  It  was  as 
though  an  entire  nation,  long  suffering  some  grievous 
malady,  had  suffered  to  the  extreme  of  endurance,  and 
was  approaching  near  to  dissolution.  The  end  came  now. 
The  government,  an  autocracy,  efficient  formerly  in  hold- 
ing down  its  people,  was  overthrown.  This  revolution 
began  in  March.  For  a  while  it  was  hoped  that  under 
a  new  liberal  government  Russia  might  become  strong 
again,  and  once  more  take  an  important  part  in  the  war. 
But  actually  the  people  would  endure  nothing  further,  and 
they  fell  a  prey  to  visionaries  and  radicals,  who,  if  they 
were  not  traitors,  wished  to  establish  in  the  distracted 
country  new  systems  such  as  had  never  before  existed  ex- 
cept in  the  minds  of  theorists  and  writers.  Under  the  Bol- 
shevihi  Russia  withdrew  from  the  war.  In  the  following 
year,  March,  1918,  they  signed  the  terrible  Peace  of  Brest- 
Litovsk,  by  which  Russia  was  dismembered  and  cut  off 
from  the  sea,  and  reduced  to  impotence.  They  now 
applied  themselves  to  the  establishment  of  the  extremest 
socialism,  seeming  to  care  little  for  the  fact  that  Russia 
had  lost  by  the  treaty  what  her  leaders  had  striven  for 
ages  to  gain.  At  last  the  Germans  were  completely  free 
in  the  east.  Now  they  could  devote  all  their  strength  to 
one  more  crushing  blow  in  the  west. 

In  October,  1917,  there  was  an  indication  of  what  they 
could  do  when  Italy  was  struck  and  almost  destroyed  at 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


483 


a  blow.     The  Italians  had  had  much  success  in  spite  of     The  Austro- 

difficulties  incredible  and  elsewhere    scarce    understood.     J*^''^" 

....        4  •     TT  II      frontier 

Most  of  Italy's  territory  adjoining'  Austria-JIun^Mry  ended 

at  the  very  foothills  of  the  Alps.     Innnediately  beyond, 

held  by  the  enemy  and  strongly  fortified  in  advance,  rose 

tier  on  tier  of  giant  mountains,  until  the  ramparts  at  last 


30.     AUSTRO-ITALIAN  FRONTIER 


were  high  above  the  snow  and  the  clouds.  To  the  south, 
at  the  head  of  the  Adriatic  Sea,  was  the  Carso  Plateau, 
littered  with  rocks,  honeycombed  with  caves,  treeless, 
without  water,  blazing  under  the  sun.  Through  all  these 
defences  the  Italians  with  undaunted  courage  had  slowly 
battered  their  way.  They  had  mastered  the  Carso,  and 
now  were  near  to  Trieste.     They  had  captured  Monte 


The  Italians 
batter  their 
way  through 


484 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Italians 
defeated: 
Caporetto, 
1917 


Destruction 
of  shipping 


The  United 
States  joins 
the  Allies 


Santo,  and  might  soon  strike  through  to  open  country 
at  Laibach,  and  then  march  on  toward  Vienna.  But  the 
Austrians,  reinforced  by  Germans,  now  massed  against 
them,  and,  corrupting  some  of  the  discontented  soldiers 
and  thus  making  a  weak  point  in  the  Hne,  suddenly  at- 
tacked with  overwhelming  numbers  and  with  the  fearful 
"mustard  gas."  They  burst  completely  through,  utterly 
defeating  the  Italians.  The  result  of  this  battle  of  Capo- 
retto was  that  a  large  part  of  the  Italian  army  was  cap- 
tured and  half  of  its  artillery,  with  all  the  territory  that  it 
had  gained  in  weary  months  of  fighting.  The  Teutonic 
armies  did  not  stop  until  they  were  nearly  in  sight  of  Venice; 
but  then  the  Italians  rallied  with  the  courage  of  despair, 
and,  by  a  magnificent  effort,  finally  saved  their  country  by 
standing  along  the  little  River  Piave.  None  the  less,  Italy 
was  now  thoroughly  discouraged,  and  almost  persuaded  to 
abandon  the  struggle. 

But  more  awful  than  any  of  these  things  was  the 
havoc  wrought  by  the  submarines.  As  soon  as  un- 
restricted warfare  was  begun  the  losses  were  terrible.  In 
February,  1917,  800,000  tons  of  shipping  was  destroyed, 
and  the  Mediterranean  and  the  waters  about  the  British 
Isles  became  a  veritable  graveyard  of  ships.  If  destruc- 
tion at  this  rate  could  be  continued,  then  there  was  no 
doubt  that  the  cause  of  the  Allies  was  doomed,  and  that 
the  end  was  not  very  far  off. 

Against  all  this  was  to  be  set  one  great  factor,  which,  in 
the  end,  was  to  counterbalance  all  the  others:  the  United 
States  had  entered  the  conflict  against  Germany  and  her 
partners.  When  the  Great  War  broke  out  there,  were 
probably  not  many  Americans  who  believed  that  their 
country  would  ever  be  drawn  into  it.  Many  of  the  people 
understood  little  about  the  causes  or  issues  of  the  struggle, 
and  nearly  all  of  them  dreaded  foreign  complications  and 
hated  the  thought  of  a  war.  But  in  less  than  three  years 
the  opinion  of  the  great  majority  had  changed  profoundly, 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


485 


and  by  the  beginning  of  1917  they  wilhngly  followed  their 
leader  into  the  contest.  There  were  several  reasons  for 
this.  From  the  beginning  people  were  struck  with  horror 
at  the  methods  that  the  Germans  employed.  In  Servia, 
in  Poland,  in  Belgium,  and  in  France,  they  began  im- 
mediately to  do  harsh  and  terrible  things.  Civilians, 
including  even  women  and  children,  were  shot  down; 
hostages  were  seized,  ruinous  fines  were  imposed  for  small 
offences.  There  was  plundering  and  there  was  wild  excess 
on  the  part  of  German  soldiers.  Evidently  much  of  it  was 
being  done  with  the  idea  of  organizing  terror  and  striking 
into  the  hearts  of  the  people  such  unreasoning  fear  that 
they  would  not  dare  in  the  smallest  degree  to  interfere 
with  the  conquest  of  their  country,  and  would  perhaps 
flee  away  in  wild  disorder,  clogging  the  roads  and  impeding 
the  movements  of  their  own  armies.  Many  of  the  deeds 
perpetrated  were  so  contrary  to  principles  of  humanity 
and  to  the  spirit  of  western  civilization,  that  at  first  the 
reports  concerning  them  were  not  believed;  but  soon 
evidence  accumulated  in  such  manner  that  many  of 
them  could  not  be  doubted.  For  an  alleged  offence, 
never  proved  and  probably  not  committed,  the  great  and 
ancient  towTi  of  Louvain  was  fired  and  a  large  part  of  it 
burned  to  the  ground.  The  German  ambassador  in 
Constantinople  declared  that  if  necessary  the  entire 
French  nation  would  be  held  as  hostage  and  starved  to 
death  in  order  to  make  England  abandon  the  war.  In 
Belgium  the  Germans  methodically  seized  all  the  resources 
of  the  country,  callously  leaving  the  people  to  starve;  and 
before  long  the  Belgians  would  most  probably  have  died 
of  hunger  had  they  not  been  fed  by  the  charity  of  the 
British,  the  French,  and  the  people  of  the  United  States. 
"In  the  Name  of  God  the  Father,"  ran  the  appeals  for 
these  people,  while  the  disgraceful  spectacle  continued  of  a 
captive  nation  being  fed  not  by  the  conquerors  but  by  other 
nations.     To  Poland,  outside  relief  could  not  come,  and  it 


Sentiment 
affected  by 
German 
procedure 


Treatment 
of  Belgium 


486 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Frightful- 
ness 


Danger  to 
American 
ideals 


was  not  long  before  the  appalling  conditions  there  had 
caused  the  death  of  the  old  people  and  many  of  the  children. 
This  was  commenced  not  when  the  Germans  themselves 
were  starving,  but  almost  at  the  beginning  of  the  war. 

The  Cathedral  of  Rheims,  one  of  the  supreme  examples 
of  Gothic  architecture  and  religious  art,  something  that 
had  been  loved  and  admired  for  centuries,  which  could  not 
be  replaced,  was  not  far  from  the  line  of  battle.  Because, 
as  they  said,  it  was  used  by  the  French  as  an  observation 
post,  the  Germans  deliberately  ruined  it  with  shells  from 
their  cannon.  From  the  very  beginning  the  great  Ger- 
man airships,  the  Zeppelins,  sailed  aloft  over  the  cities  of 
England  and  France,  dropping  high  explosives  with  fearful 
effect.  Some  military  advantage  was  thereby  procured, 
but  the  nature  of  air  raids  was  such  that  the  bombs  were 
more  apt  to  drop  upon  civilians  than  upon  fortifications. 
In  the  same  way  German  warships  dashed  out  when 
they  could  and  bombarded  undefended  coast  towns,  de- 
claring that  they  were  fortresses,  but  actually  for  the 
purpose  of  striking  terror  into  the  people.  The  aversion 
with  which  all  this  was  regarded  was  enhanced  by  dreadful 
stories  told  of  the  way  in  which  prisoners  in  Germany 
were  starved  and  abused;  while  the  spectacle,  constantly 
more  frequent,  of  men,  and  even  women  and  children, 
being  drowned  at  sea,  with  no  hope  of  rescue,  and, 
indeed,  the  desire  that  they  should  be  sunk  "without  a 
trace,"  constantly  increased  sympathy  for  the  Allies  and 
horror  and  dislike  of  the  Germans.  Finally,  nothing 
did  more  to  prejudice  neutral  opinion  from  the  start  than 
the  manner  in  which  the  rights  of  Belgium  were  treated 
as  "a  scrap  of  paper"  and  that  unhappy  little  country 
trampled  in  the  dust. 

These  were  the  things  which  gradually  swayed  the  feel- 
ings of  the  mass  of  the  people  in  the  United  States  and 
elsewhere.  But  with  the  leaders  there  were  considerations 
still  more  important.     It  was  felt  instinctively,  and  it  was 


THE    GREAT    WxVR 


487 


realized  more  and  more  clearly,  that  the  people  of  France 
and  England  stood  for  much  the  same  things  that  Ameri- 
cans did,  and  that  the  Germans  represented  a  different 
system.  Evidently  there  was  now  going  on  in  Europe  a 
death  struggle  between  the  two.  If  the  ideals  of  democ- 
racy, individualism,  and  personal  liberty  went  down  to 
destruction  across  the  Atlantic,  they  would  afterward 
most  probably  be  in  grave  danger  in  the  United  States. 
Then,  in  the  opinion  of  many,  the  American  people  would 
later  on  have  to  fight  against  German  encroachment  even 
as  the  people  of  France  and  England  were  fighting  now. 
By  the  beginning  of  1917  it  began  to  seem  that  Allied  vic- 
tory was  not  to  be  hoped  for.  Therefore,  every  considera- 
tion of  prudence  seemed  to  urge  that  Americans  join  in 
the  conflict  and  fight  along  with  their  friends,  rather  than 
later  on  fight  alone  against  a  mightier,  triumphant  Ger- 
man Empire.  These  feelings  became  constantly  stronger, 
and  at  last  many  people  felt  that  it  was  not  only  shameful 
but  very  dangerous  for  the  United  States  to  remain  neutral 
so  long.  It  will  always  be  matter  of  opinion  whether  the 
American  Government  might  not  better  have  declared  war 
sooner  than  it  did;  but  perhaps  the  President  was  right 
in  waiting  for  public  sentiment  to  support  him.  Early  in 
1917  he  himself  took  the  lead,  and  when  the  German 
ambassador  delivered  his  note  announcing  unrestricted 
submarine  warfare  President  Wilson  advised  that  rela- 
tions with  Germany  be  severed,  and  that  assistance  be 
given  to  the  Allies  with  all  of  America's  resources.  April 
6,  1917,  the  United  States  declared  war.  It  was  one  of 
the  most  momentous  events  in  the  history  of  the  American 
people.  Their  intervention  was  destined  to  determine  the 
issue  of  the  struggle. 

America  alone  could  supply  the  vast  resources  needed 
to  defeat  the  Central  Powers.  The  Germans  had  not 
only  the  advantage  of  position  and  the  shorter  lines,  but 
greater  resources  in  iron  and  coal,  and  hence  in  munitions 


Dangerous 
for    America 
to  remain  out 
of  the  war 


The 
United 
States 
prepares 


488 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Immense 
resources 
of  the 
United 
States 


The  sub- 
marines 
checked 


of  war.  But  with  the  accession  of  the  United  States  the 
Allies  again  became  definitely  superior  in  these  basic  re- 
sources, and  if  only  there  were  still  enough  time  and  if 
only  they  did  not  lose  heart  and  give  up  the  struggle, 
victory  would  almost  certainly  be  theirs.  At  first,  how- 
ever, it  seemed  that  there  might  not  be  time  for  the 
United  States  to  assemble  her  resources  and  bring  them 
to  bear  in  Europe,  and  that  she  had,  indeed,  entered  the 
struggle  too  late.  It  had  taken  England  two  years  to 
bring  her  great  strength  to  bear;  it  would  probably  take 
the  Americans  as  long.  They  did  begin  with  an  energy 
and  immensity  of  effort  that  left  no  doubt  that  they  had  re- 
solved to  give  themselves  entirely  to  the  task;  but  through- 
out 1917,  while  the  Allies  were  meeting  with  such  disaster  in 
Europe,  the  work  of  the  United  States  was  almost  entirely 
preparation.  Great  armies  were  raised  by  compulsory 
service;  the  making  of  rifles,  cannon,  shells,  and  the  build- 
ing of  ships  were  begun  on  an  unheard-of  scale,  but  nothing 
would  be  ready  for  some  time.  Meanwhile,  the  Germans 
hoped  to  win  the  war  by  means  of  their  submarines,  or 
else  by  one  more  great  stroke  in  the  west. 

By  the  beginning  of  1918  the  Germans  had  definitely 
failed  in  one  respect.  No  single  device  was  ever  found 
for  disposing  of  the  submarines,  but  gradually  they  were 
subdued.  The  protection  of  warships  had  long  since 
been  effected  by  putting  around  them  a  screen  of  fast- 
moving  destroyers.  As  soon  as  the  United  States  entered 
the  lists  her  navy  joined  in  the  work.  The  naval  supe- 
riority of  the  Allies  was  for  the  first  time  beyond  all  ques- 
tion, and  the  addition  of  the  American  destroyers  made  it 
possible  to  protect  "convoys"  of  merchant  ships  also.  The 
rate  of  destruction  was  now  much  diminished.  Moreover, 
a  new  and  terrible  device  was  employed  with  considerable 
effect,  the  depth  bomb,  which  exploded  beneath  the  water 
with  fearful  effect.  Furthermore,  a  vast  "barrage"  of 
mines  was  laid  in  the  North  Sea,  hindering  the  exit  of  the 


THE    GREAT    WAR  489 

German  submarfnos,  and  in   1918  the  Britlsli,   in  daring 

raids,  succeeded  in  partly  blocking  tlie  Belgian  liarbors 

out  of  which  the  submarines  came.     Finally,  the  Allied 

submarines   lay   in    wait   for   those   of   the   enemy,   and, 

assisted  by  airplanes,  destroyed  a  large  number  of  them. 

Altogether,  the  German  under-water  craft  became  much 

less  dangerous  and  effective,  and  while  they  continued  to 

be  a  serious  menace  until  the  end  of  the  war,  yet  by  the 

beginning  of  1918  the  Germans  could  no  longer  hope  to 

win  by  them  solely. 

Thus  the  Allies  would  have  time,  and  time  was  now  on     Exhaustion 

their  side.     There  might  still  be  a  long  and  costly  war  if     near 

the  Germans  stood  on  the  defensive  and  fought  with  the 

protection  of  their  fortified  lines;  though  if  the  attack  was 

resolutely  pushed  their  ultimate  defeat  was  certain.     On 

the  other  hand,  they  still  had  one  chance  to  win:  if  they 

could  strike  on  the  west  front  before  American  aid  arrived, 

it  might  be  that  they  would  do  what  they  had  failed  to  do 

in  the  beginning,  and  that  victory  would  still  be  theirs. 

This  chance  they  resolved  to  take,  and  all  through  the 

winter  of   1917-18  there  was  a  constant  movement  of 

troops  and  guns  from  the  east  to  the  west.     Russia  was 

completely  broken,  and  only  such  forces  were  left  there 

as  were  needed  to  guard  the  conquests  and  get  such  scanty 

supplies  as  that  ruined  country  could  furnish.     In  truth 

the  war  had  reached  the  stage  where  all  the  contestants 

were  nearly  exhausted.     Italy  was  recovering  from  the     The 

defeat  of  Caporetto,  but  she  was  profoundly  discouraged,      strength  of 
_  11,11  11  PI  °  the  combat- 

France,  who  had  so  long  borne  the  brunt  oi  the  struggle,      ants  nearly 

had  lost  a  great  part  of  all  her  young  men,  and  French-     gone 

men,  though  unwilling  to  yield,  were  beginning  to  despair 

of  ever  defeating  the  foe.     Britain  also  was  nearly  sunk 

beneath  the  burdens   she  bore,  and  the  fearful  fighting 

of  1917  had  greatly  depleted  her  armies  in  France.     On 

the  other  side  Austria  was  at  her  last  gasp  and  able  to 

do  little  more.     Germany,  with  all  her  strength  organized 


490 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Ger- 
man offen- 
sive, 1918 


The  Battle 
of  Picardy 


The  British 
with  "backs 
to  the  wall" 


for  war,  might  fight  on  for  some  time,  perhaps,  and  might 
even  conquer  by  a  sudden  blow,  but  if  she  struck  the  blow 
and  failed,  then,  as  after  events  were  to  show,  her  power 
would  crash  down  at  once  into  ruin. 

As  Napoleon  had  once  done,  Germany's  leaders  resolved 
to  stake  all  upon  one  stroke.  In  the  spring  of  1918  she 
took  the  offensive  and  struck  out  with  a  blow  that  was  like 
unloosing  the  forces  of  hell.  March  21,  the  Germans 
attacked  from  St.  Quentin,  at  a  point  where  the  British 
had  recently  taken  over  the  lines  from  the  French.  The 
British  were  not  yet  familiar  with  their  ground,  and  a 
heavy  mist  enabled  the  enemy  to  surprise  them.  Shells 
from  the  great  guns  fell  far  behind  the  front  lines,  while 
light  cannon  and  countless  machine  guns  were  brought  up 
by  the  attackers.  The  British  were  beaten  as  never  be- 
fore during  the  war,  and  for  the  first  time  on  the  west- 
ern front  fortified  lines  were  broken  completely.  The 
German  plan  had  been  to  separate  the  French  from  the 
British,  and  drive  the  British  back  upon  the  Channel  where 
they  could  have  been  destroyed;  but  to  the  north,  about 
Arras,  the  British  lines  held  so  that  this  was  by  no  means 
accomplished.  None  the  less,  the  Germans  had  broken 
clear  through,  and  when  at  last  their  advance  was  arrested, 
they  had  gone  more  than  thirty  miles,  up  to  the  out- 
skirts of  the  all-important  railroad  center,  Amiens. 
Scarcely  had  the  fighting  died  down  when  another  fearful 
blow  was  struck  farther  north.  The  lines  were  raked 
with  shells  and  every  position  drenched  with  gases.  In 
Armentieres  the  streets  ran  with  the  liquid  of  the  mustard 
gas.  An  overwhelming  force  was  thrown  against  the 
British  again,  and  they  were  driven  back  so  far  that  Sir 
Douglas  Haig,  their  commander,  told  them  they  were 
fighting  with  "backs  to  the  wall."  But  they  fought  as  the 
British  usually  do  fight,  and,  with  some  aid  from  the  French, 
held  on  and  barred  the  way  to  the  Channel.  This  was  in 
April.     In   May  came  the  third  phase  of  the  German 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


491 


offensive,  this  time  against  the  French  lines.  In  one 
great  rush  they  went  through  the  position  of  Chemin  des 
Dames,  and  piercing  far  through  the  hnes,  rushed  on  until 
once  more  they  came  to  the  Marne.  It  was  evident  that 
the  crisis  of  the  war  had  come.  If  the  CJermans  could, 
from  the  positions  they  had  taken,  strike  out  again  with 
the  same  success,  they  might  next  time  get  as  far  as 
Paris.  Under  stress  of  the  fearful  peril  all  the  Allied 
armies  were  at  last  put  under  one  command,  under  the 
great  French  general  Foch,  and  cries  went  out  to  the 
United  States  to  hasten  her  succor. 

The  Americans  had  made  giant  strides  in  their  vast 
preparations,  but  the  best  judges  abroad  did  not  expect 
them  to  be  ready  yet.  Now,  however,  the  need  was  so 
pressing  that  they  were  asked  to  send  across  troops  only 
partly  trained.  This  was  done.  The  British  furnished 
most  of  the  shipping,  from  their  own  diminished  stock,  and, 
protected  by  warships  from  the  submarines,  there  now 
began  across  the  ocean  a  movement  of  men  such  as  had 
never  been  seen  before  in  the  w^orld.  Early  in  July  there 
were  a  million  American  soldiers  in  France,  and  they  were 
now  coming  at  the  rate  of  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  million 
each  month.  And  more  than  that,  as  they  were  tried,  at 
first  in  very  small  operations,  they  bore  themselves  so  well 
as  to  give  much  hope  for  the  future.  Evidently  there  was 
not  much  more  time  for  the  Germans  to  get  the  decision 
before  the  weight  of  America  was  felt.  Twice  again  did 
the  Germans  strike,  with  less  success  than  before.  Then 
July  14  their  last  offensive  was  undertaken.  Between 
Rheims  and  Chateau-Thierry  the  attack  was  delivered  and 
an  effort  made  to  cross  the  Marne  and  open  the  road  to 
Paris.  But  the  German  plans  had  become  known,  and  the 
French,  giving  ground  a  little,  smothered  the  abandoned 
positions  in  a  whirlwind  of  hre,  and  after  terrible  losses 
the  Germans  were  brought  completely  to  a  stand. 

Four  days  later,  July  18,  Marshal  Foch  began  a  great 


America 
answers  the 
caU 


Last  effort 
of  the  Ger- 
mans: 
Second  Bat- 
tle of  the 
Marne 


492 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Beginning 
of  the  Allied 
offensive 


Great  as- 
sault on  the 
German 
lines 


Allied  offensive.  The  assistance  from  the  United  States 
had  enabled  him  to  establish  a  reserve  and  again  assemble 
an  "army  of  maneuver."  The  Germans  had  driven 
three  salients  into  his  line,  and  in  these  salients  they  had 
the  inner  position  and  the  short  lines,  but  between  the 
two  greater  salients,  in  the  region  from  Montdidier  to 
Soissons,  the  Allies  had  the  same  advantage.  Accordingly 
it  was  from  this  part  of  the  line  that  the  Allied  offensive 
began.  A  sudden  attack  by  French  troops  and  some 
Americans  nearly  captured  Soissons,  and  threatened  with 
gravest  peril  the  German  forces  under  the  Crown  Prince. 
After  many  days  of  desperate  fighting  these  forces  were 
extricated,  but  with  heavy  losses  and  after  abandoning 
what  they  had  taken  in  the  successful  stroke  that  had 
brought  them  down  to  the  Marne.  Meanwhile,  August 
8,  the  British  struck  out  at  Montdidier,  at  the  side  of  the 
salient  to  the  north,  and,  capturing  many  prisoners  and 
many  important  places,  retook  what  they  had  lost  in  the 
disaster  of  March.  During  the  same  time  the  Germans 
abandoned  without  fighting  the  blood-soaked  positions 
captured  at  such  terrible  cost  when  they  tried  to  break 
through  to  the  Channel.  By  the  end  of  August,  there- 
fore, the  great  danger  was  past,  and  the  Germans  had 
definitively  lost  the  offensive. 

The  question  now  was  whether  it  would  be  better  to 
wait  until  the  following  year,  or  press  hard  upon  the  de- 
feated Germans  and  try  to  end  the  war  shortly.  Great 
as  was  the  assistance  of  America,  it  would  not  be  until 
1919  that  she  could  exert  her  full  force.  Then  she  could 
have  millions  of  soldiers  fully  equipped,  a  vast  number  of 
airplanes,  and  an  incredible  supply  of  artillery.  German 
spies  carried  news  of  the  colossal  preparations  to  their 
country,  and  it  was  reported  that  a  far  more  deadly  gas 
than  any  used  hitherto  was  being  made  in  quantities 
larger  than  gases  were  made  in  all  the  other  warring 
countries  combined.     Next  year  all  this  could  be  used. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


493 


But  Marshal  Foch,  understanding  the  situation  more 
clearly,  resolved  to  continue  the  attack,  and  the  fighting 
went  on  without  any  cessation. 

September  13,  in  their  first  large  operation,  the  Amer- 
icans wiped  out  the  St.  Mihiel  salient  which  the  Germans 
had  driven  to  the  south  of  Verdun  in  the  early  weeks  of 
the  war.  Later  on  now  it  would  be  possible  to  attack  the 
great  German  fortress  of  ^letz.  A  fortnight  later  a 
large  American  army  began  fighting  to  clear  the  Argonne 
Forest,  which  was  the  great  buttress  of  the  German  lines 
in  the  south,  and  which  protected  one  of  their  all- 
important  lines  of  railroad  communication.  In  the  center 
the  French  did  not  press  the  attack  upon  the  impregnal>le 
positions  about  Laon,  but  in  the  north  the  British  with 
some  Americans  and  some  Belgians  tried  to  smash 
through  the  Hindenburg  Line  in  one  place  and  in  another 
break  do^vn  into  Flanders.  It  was  the  Germans  who 
were  now  with  their  backs  to  the  wall. 

The  failing  German  fortunes  were  accompanied  by  col- 
lapse everywhere  else.  The  Allied  army  which  in  October, 
1915,  had  landed  at  Salonica  had  never  accomplished 
anything,  largely  because  it  could  not  be  strongly  rein- 
forced and  because  the  submarines  constantly  harassed 
its  communication  line.  But  now,  in  September,  1918, 
it  suddenly  fell  upon  the  Bulgars,  and  broke  through  their 
positions.  In  a  few  days  the  Serbs  were  back  once  more 
in  their  country,  and  the  Allies  were  threatening  the 
Bulgarian  plain.  By  the  end  of  the  month  Bulgaria  had 
signed  an  armistice  agreement  equivalent  to  complete 
surrender.  Turkey,  long  since  exliausted,  and  just 
defeated  in  Asia  by  the  British,  was  now  in  a  hopeless 
position,  and  her  surrender  soon  followed.  This  brought 
to  an  end  the  German  dream  of  domination  in  the  Balkans 
and  of  founding  a  great  "^Middle  Europe."  In  October, 
the  Austrians,  urged  on  by  the  Germans,  but  with  almost 
no  power  left,  attacked  the   Italians,  failed   completely, 


The  Ameri- 
cans and 
the  British 
go  forward 


Germany's 

allies  sur- 
render 


The  Italians 
destroy 
Austria's 
power 


494 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Ger- 
mans com- 
pletely 
defeated 


The  British 
break  the 
Hindenburg 
Line 


The  German 
armies  in 
danger  of 
destruction 


and  then,  struck  by  the  Itahan  armies,  suffered  the 
greatest  disaster  of  the  war.  The  entire  Austrian  forces 
surrendered  or  fled  as  disorganized  rabble,  abandoning 
their  stores  and  cannon.  In  a  few  days  the  Itahans  were 
through  the  mountains  at  last,  at  Trieste,  in  the  Trentino, 
and  on  the  march  for  Vienna.  November  4,  Austria- 
Hungary  surrendered.  The  Germans  now  fought  alone. 
While  these  disasters  were  ruining  the  German  cause, 
they  were  fighting  the  last  of  their  fight.  Steadily  through 
the  tangled  thickets,  the  rocks,  and  the  mazes  of  barbed 
wire  of  the  Argonne,  the  new  American  army  was  fighting 
against  the  inferior  German  force;  and  though  their  losses 
were  very  heavy,  they  advanced  steadily,  capturing  posi- 
tions deemed  impregnable  hitherto,  and  presently  getting 
the  main  railway  line,  the  vital  line  of  German  communica- 
tions in  the  south,  under  the  fire  of  their  long-range  guns. 
If  this  line  were  cut,  a  large  part  of  the  German  army 
might  be  forced  to  surrender.  To  the  north  the  British 
and  their  comrades,  with  as  splendid  dash  as  was  ever 
seen  during  the  war,  broke  at  last  all  through  the  Hinden- 
burg Line,  with  its  wide  trenches,  its  deep  underground 
fortifications,  its  labyrinths  of  barbed  wire,  and  its  thou- 
sands of  machine-gun  emplacements.  Here  the  courage 
of  the  British  soldier  was  aided  by  the  "tanks'*  or  small 
moving  fortresses,  which  the  British  had  first  used  in  the 
Somme  offensive  of  1916,  and  which  at  last  solved  the 
problem  of  smashing  the  systems  of  entrenchments. 
Moreover,  they  now  broke  through  in  Belgium  and  oc- 
cupied the  coast  with  its  submarine  bases.  Then,  turning 
south,  they  began  to  threaten  the  other  great  artery  of 
German  rail  communications,  the  trunk  line  from  Paris 
to  Berlin,  which  goes  through  the  valley  of  the  Meuse,  by 
Namur  and  Liege.  If  this  should  be  cut,  and  if  the  Ameri- 
cans cut  the  other  line  in  the  south,  then  the  Germans 
might  be  forced  to  surrender  on  the  field  or  else  save  them- 
selves only  by  a  flight  like  that  of  the  Austrian  armies. 


THE    GREAT    WAR 


495 


The  German  soldiers,  so  wonderful  in  the  days  of  suc- 
cess, began  to  waver  now,  and  disaffection  and  despair 
increased  among  the  German   people.     They   had  been 
slowly  starved  by  the  blockade,  and,  after  staking  all  they 
had,  they  had  lost.     Widespread  discontent  was  abetted 
by  bolshevist  propaganda  from  the  east,  ever  insidiously 
crossing  the  frontier.     The  men  of  the  navy,  ordered  to 
dash  out  for  a  last  effort,  mutinied.     The  end   was  at 
hand.     The  authorities  asked  for  an  armistice,  but  Presi- 
dent Wilson,  answering  for  the  Allies,  replied  in  effect 
that  the  Germans  could  not  be  trusted,  and  that  the  only 
conditions  to  be  granted  would  be  such  that  if  the  Ger- 
mans should  later  on  wish  to  resume  the  war  they  would 
not  be  able  to  do  so.     When  the  conditions  were   an- 
nounced, they  were  terrible  enough:  not  only  must  the 
Germans  at  once  evacuate  France,  Belgium,  and  their 
other  conquests,  but  they  must  abandon  Alsace-Lorraine 
and  withdraw  behind  the  Rhine,  leaving  the  bridgehead 
fortresses  to  the  Allies,  and  giving  up  their  richest  indus- 
trial district.     They  must  surrender  their  fleet  and  their 
submarines,   disband  their  army,  and  give  up  most  of 
their  military  equipment.     It  was  evident  at  once  that 
the  acceptance  of  such  terms  w^ould  mean  the  end  of  the 
war.     Revolution  and  disturbances  now  arose  in  various 
parts  of  the  Reich.     November  9,  the  German  emperor 
abdicated  and  fled  to  Holland.     Two  days  later,  November 
11,  German  emissaries  signed  the  armistice  terms.     The 
most  terrible  of  all  wars  had  ended. 


The  Ger- 
man Em- 
pire sur- 
renders 


Conditions 
of  the  armis- 
tice granted 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

General  accounts:  for  brief  narratives — S.  B.  Harding,  A 
Syllabus  of  the  Great  War  (1918);  C.  J.  H.  Hayes,  A  Brief  History 
of  the  Great  War  (1920) ;  A.  F.  Pollard,  A  Short  History  of  the 
Great  War  (1920);  also  F.  A.  Marcii,  History  of  the  World  War 
(1918);  D.  W.  Johnson,  Topography  and  Strategy  in  the  War 
(1917);  longer  accounts  are  John  Buchan,  Nelsons  History  of 


496  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

the  War  (1915-);  F.  H.  Simonds,  The  Great  War,  5  volumes 
(1914-20),  perhaps  the  best  of  the  longer,  non-technical  ac- 
counts. Several  periodical  histories  were  undertaken  by  great 
metropolitan  journals :  London  Times  History  of  the  War,  Man- 
chester Guardian  History  of  the  War,  New  York  Times  Current 
History  of  the  War,  voluminous  and  discursive,  but  with  a  vast 
amount  of  interesting  information.  Of  the  longer  histories 
the  most  important  are  the  British  History  of  the  Great  War 
Based  on  Ojfficial  Documents  (1920-);  Guerre  de  19H:  Docu- 
ments Officiels,  Textes  Legislatifs  et  Reglementaires  (1914—), 
official  publication  of  the  French  Government;  Der  Grosse 
Krieg  in  Einzeldarstellungen,  which  appeared  in  parts  from  time 
to  time,  published  by  the  German  Great  General  Staff  (now 
disbanded).  Many  excellent  and  interesting  histories  have  al- 
ready appeared  abroad:  C.  H.  Baer,  Der  Volkerkrieg  (1915—); 
G.  Hanotaux,  Histoire  Ulustree  de  la  Guerre  de  1914,'  H.  F.  Hel- 
molt,  Der  Weltkrieg  (1915-);  F.  M.  Kircheisen,  Das  Volker- 
ringen,  iyiJf-15  (1915-);  Hermann  Stegemann,  Geschichte  des 
Krieges,  volumes  I-III  (1917-19),  excellent. 

Accounts  by  principal  commanders:  General  Erich  von  Fal- 
kenhayn,  trans.  General  Headquarters,  1914-1916,  and  Its 
Critical  Decisions  (1919);  Field  Marshal  Viscount  French,  1914 
(1919) ;  General  Basil  Gourko,  Memories  and  Impressions  of  War 
and  Revolution  in  Russia,  1914-1917  (1918);  Sir  Douglas  Haig's 
Despatches  {December,  1915-April,  1919),  edited  by  Lieut.-Col. 
J.  H.  Boraston  (1919);  General  Erich  Ludendorff,  My  War 
Memories,  1914-1918,  2  vols.  (1919),  excellent  comments  on 
strategy  and  great  events  in  the  conflict. 

Particular  episodes  or  campaigns: Von  Auffenberg-Komarow, 
Aus  Osterreich-Ungarns  Theilnahme  am  Weltkriege  (1920),  by 
one  of  the  Austrian  commanders;  General-Major  Baumgarten- 
Crusius,  Die  Marneschlacht  (1919),  very  important,  based  on 
German  official  documents;  General  Berthaut,  "L'Erreur^' 
de  1914,  Reponse  aux  Critiques  (1919);  E.  Bircher,  Die  Schlacht 
an  der  Marne  (1918),  major  in  the  General  Staff  of  the  Ger- 
man army;  John  Buchan,  The  Battle  of  the  Somme  (1917);  Gen- 
eral Luigi  Capello,  Note  di  Guerra  (1920),  for  Italy's  part; 
Memoires  de  General  Gallieni,  Defense  de  Paris  (1920);  Louis 
Gillet,  La  Bataille  de  Verdun  (1920);  Sidney  Low,  Italy  in  the 
War  (1917);  Louis  Madelin,  La  Victoire  de  la  Marne  (1916), 
trans.,  perhaps  the  best  account  for  the  general  reader;  John 
Masefield,   Gallipoli   (1916);   Major-General   Sir  F.   Maurice, 


THE    GREAT    WAR  497 

Forty  Days  in  19U  (1910);  IT.  W.  Nevinson.  The  Dardanelles 
Campaign  (1918);  [luionymoiis],  Po^irquoi  VAllernagne  a  Capi- 
tuU  le  11  Novembre  1918  (1919),  evidently  bused  on  documents 
in  possession  of  the  French  General  Headquarters;  G.  Prezzolini 
Caporetto  (1919);  Raymond  Recouly,  Foch;  le  Vainqueur  de  la 
Guerre  (1919);  Lieut. -Col.  Rousset,  La  Bataille  de  VAime 
{Avril-Mai,  1917)  (1919),  for  the  Nivelle  offensive;  D.  Sanco- 
vici.  La  Paix  de  Bucharest  (1919);  Lieut.-Col.  de  Thomasson, 
Le  Revers  de  19 H  et  Ses  Causes  (1919). 

The  war  on  the  sea:  Charles  Domville-Fife,  Submarines  and 
Sea  Pouier  (1919),  excellent;  Admiral  Lord  Jellicoc,  The  Grmid 
Fleet,  19U-1916  (1918),  a  very  important  book,  The  Crisis  of 
the  Naval  War  (1920);  J.  Leyland,  The  Rmjal  Navy  (1914); 
Captain  L.  Persius,  Der  Seekrieg  (1919);  Rear- Admiral  W.  S. 
Sims,  The  Victory  at  Sea  (1920);  Grand  Admiral  von  Tirpitz, 
trans.  My  Memoirs,  2  vols.  (1919). 

The  war  in  the  air:  Major  Charles  C.  Turner,  The  Struggle  in 
the  Air,  19U-1918  (1919). 

America  and  the  war:  Lindsay  Rogers,  Americans  Case  Against 
Germany  (1917),  a  good  brief  account;  Diplomatic  Correspondence 
Between  the  United  States  and  Germany,  August  1,  19H-April  6, 
1917,  edited  by  J.  B.  Scott  (1919);  Lieut.-Col.  de  Chambrun 
and  Captain  de  Marenches,  UArmee  Americaine  dans  le  Conflit 
EuropSen  (1919),  excellent. 

The  Allied  soldiers,  and  especially  the  British,  in  the  war: 
Philip  Gibbs,  Nmv  It  Can  Be  Told  (1920),  a  book  that  deserves 
the  widest  possible  reading. 

German  practices  in  the  war:  Die  Deutsche  Kriegsfuhrung 
und  das  Volkerrecht  (1919),  a  German  official  publication  at- 
tempting justification;  Hugh  Gibson,  A  Journal  Jrom  Our 
Legation  in  Belgium  (1917);  S.  S.  McClure,  Obstacles  to  Peace 
(1917);  Henry  Morgenthau,  Ambassador  Morgenthaus  Story 
(1918);  A.  J.  Toynbee,  The  German  Terror  in  Belgium  (1917), 
The  German  Terror  in  France  (1917);  Brand  Whitlock,  Belgium: 
a  Personal  Narrative,  2  vols.  (1919),  excellent. 

The  neutrals:  Luis  Bello,  Espana  durante  la  Guerra  (1919). 

Peace  proposals:  G.  L.  Dickinson,  Documents  and  Statements 
Relating  to  Peace  Proposals  and  War  Aims  (December,  191G- 
November,  1918)  (1919). 


CHAPTER    XVIII 
THE   SETTLEMENT   OF    1920 

The  world  must  be  made  safe  for  democracy.     Its  peace  must  be 
planted  upon  the  tested  foundations  of  political  liberty. 

Address  of  President  Wilson  to  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  April  2,  1917. 

The  idea  that  action  should  be  taken  after  this  war  to  secure  an 
enduring  peace  in  the  future.     .     .     . 
Viscount  Bryce,  Essays  and  Addresses  in  War  Time  (1918),  p. 
176. 

We  know  that  the  'power  of  the  German  arms  is  broken.     We 
know  the  extent  of  the  hatred  which  we  encounter  here. 
But  we  deny  that  Germany  and  its  people  were  alone  guilty. 
Count  Brockdorff-Rantzau  to  the  Plenipotentiaries  at  Ver- 
sailles, May  7,  1919. 

Not  since  Rome  punished  Carthage  for  Punic  faith  has  such  a  treaty 
been  written. 

New  York  Tribune,  May  8,  1919. 

The  settle-  When  the  Germans,  with  weariness  and  despair  at  home 

ment  after        and  their  armies  crumbhng  under  the  blows  of  the  AUies 
^®  '^^  at  the  front,  surrendered  by  accepting  the  armistice,  it 

was  evident  that  an  old  era  in  the  history  of  the  western 
world  had  come  to  an  end,  and  that  the  leaders  of  the  na- 
tions must  assemble  and  settle  the  affairs  of  the  age  which 
had  been  and  prepare  for  the  new  order  that  was  com- 
ing. Several  times  had  this  happened  before  in  the  his- 
tory of  Europe.  In  1648,  at  the  end  of  the  dreadful 
Thirty  Years  War,  a  general  settlement  was  made,  of 
which  the  arrangement  lasted  for  a  long  time  thereafter. 
In  1713  and  1714  the  powers  which  had  fought  out  the 
War  of  the  Spanish  Succession  arranged  the  division  of 

498 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    19^0       499 

the  Spanish  inheritance  and  checked  tlie  encroachment 
of  the  monarchs  of  France.  More  important  still,  in  1814 
and  1815  the  powers  that  had  overthrown  Napoleon  as- 
sembled at  Vienna  to  undo  his  work  and  the  results  of 
the  French  Revolution,  reestablish  legitimate  princes, 
and  divide  Europe  as  seemed  to  them  best.  And  so  now 
in  1919  the  greatest  of  all  the  peace  conferences  was 
opened  in  Paris. 

Never  had  a  peace  congress  assembled  in  the  midst  of 
such  general  interest,  or  in  the  midst  of  such  great  and 
unreasoning  expectations.  In  1648  and  1712  the  great 
mass  of  the  people  had  no  voice  in  government  and  little 
interest  in  what  governments  did.  So  it  was  in  1814, 
though  then  many  people  believed  that  a  new  and  better 
era  was  at  hand.  But  in  1919  the  people  of  those  states 
which  had  brought  the  Great  War  to  victorious  conclusion 
had  considerable  control  of  their  governments;  most  of  the 
populations  could  read  and  write,  and  had  followed  the 
events  of  the  struggle  witli  enormous  interest.  Moreover, 
whatever  the  original  aims  of  the  contestants  may  have 
been,  as  the  war  progressed  and  became  a  contest  of 
endurance  and  exliaustion,  so  that  it  was  necessary  to 
have  the  fullest  support  of  the  body  of  the  people,  such 
appeals  were  uttered  and  such  promises  made,  that  pres- 
ently to  the  people  in  Great  Britain,  Italy,  France,  and  the 
United  States  the  struggle  seemed  more  and  more  a 
contest  between  militarism  and  autocracy  on  the  one 
hand,  and  democracy  and  peaceful  ci\alization  on  the 
other.  Men  were  asked  to  throw  themselves  into  the 
fighting  now  so  that  the  world  might  be  made  "safe  for 
democracy,"  and  so  that  war  with  all  its  horrors  might 
be  brought  to  an  end.  Everywhere  tlie  masses  of  the 
people,  the  simple  minded,  the  liberal,  the  idealists, 
yearned  for  these  things  and  believed  that  they  would 
shortly  come  to  pass,  and  that  a  new  and  a  better  world 
was  about  to  be  brought  into  being. 


Public  inter- 
est and  ex- 
pectations 


Unbounded 

popular 

hopes 


500 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Presi- 
dent of  the 
United 
States 


''Fourteen 
Points" 


At  the  head  of  these  people  in  all  of  the  Allied  countries, 
and  to  some  extent  even  among  the  enemy,  was  President 
"SVilson  of  the  United  States,  the  greatest  idealist  of  his 
time.     There  was  difference  of  opinion  about  the  wisdom 
of  his  course  before  America  entered  the  war,  whether 
he  should  not  have  led  the  United  States  to  take  part  in  it 
long  before  she  finally  entered;  and  also  about  the  pro- 
priety of  some  things  which  he  afterward  did;  but  there 
could  be  no  doubt  about  the  loftiness  and  purity  of  his 
motives,  or  that  he  had  the  good  of  mankind  at  heart. 
His  speeches  and  his  communications  seemed  to  great 
numbers  of  people  in  the  Allied  countries,  and  perhaps 
even  in  Germany  and  Austria,  to  express  the  yearnings  of 
their  hearts  for  better  things.     So  it  came  about  that  at 
the  end  of  the  war  he  had  for  a  short  while  unparalleled 
influence  among  multitudes  of  people  who  trusted  with 
pathetic  confidence  that  he  would  in  some  way  bring 
about   the  great  reforms   he  had   spoken    of  so  finely, 
and  which  they  believed  would  at  once  make  the  world 
far  better  than  it  ever  had  been  in  the  past.     Many  of 
the  people  who  spoke  so  confidently  of  the  immense  im- 
provements now  suddenly  to  be  made  had  thought  little 
about  the  difficulty  of  achieving  them,  and  knew  not  that 
some  of  these  things  were  old  problems  which  had  baffled 
mankind  for  ages. 

In  January,  1918,  just  before  the  last  crisis  of  the  struggle. 
President  Wilson,  in  an  address  to  Congress,  had  outlined 
the  "Fourteen  Conditions"  of  what  he  regarded  as  proper 
peace.  Here,  in  addition  to  saying  that  Russia  should 
be  evacuated,  Belgium,  France,  Rumania,  Servia,  and 
Montenegro  evacuated  and  restored,  that  Alsace-Lorraine 
should  be  returned  to  France,  that  the  Italian  frontier 
should  be  rectified,  that  a  free  Poland  should  be  estab- 
lished, and  that  the  subject  peoples  of  Turkey  and  of 
Austria-Hungary  should  be  given  opportunity  for  autono- 
mous development,  he  declared  that  there  must  be   an 


CO  ^  00 


S 

1 

■V 

o 

^ 

T3 

t*< 

O 

V) 
(D 

c^ 

o 

CL 

. 

;i- 

(0 

Pi  Sx 

c: 

3 
o 

~s- 

^ 

s 

:^   § 

^ 

3.^ 

•^^ 

^21 

£5 

V^ 

»^ 

u 

n 
to    sa 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       501 


impartial  adjustment  of  colonial  claims  with  consideration 
of  the  populations  involved.  He  then  entered  upon  wide 
and  more  difficult  questions  in  saying  that  there  nmst  be 
"open  covenants  of  peace,  openly  arrived  at,"  and  no 
more  private  international  understanding's;  "absolute 
freedom  of  navigation  upon  the  seas";  removal  of  eco- 
nomic barriers;  guarantees  for  the  reduction  of  arma- 
ments; and  "a  general  association  of  nations"  under 
specific  covenants  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  peace. 
Some  of  these  provisions  were  at  once  criticized  as  vague 
or  liable  to  eviaent  objection,  or  impossible  of  fulfillment, 
but  they  were  immediately  accepted  by  multitudes  who 
believed  them  to  be  practicable  and  necessary  for  the  good 
of  the  world. 

Some  of  the  matters  here  proclaimed  did  present 
enormous  difficulty.  To  make  treaties  openly,  or  to  bring 
diplomacy  within  the  control  of  the  representatives  of  the 
people,  had  been  much  desired  by  reformers  for  a  long 
time  and  many  efforts  had  been  made  to  obtain  it;  but 
these  efforts  had  failed  for  reasons  well  understood  by 
some  people.  In  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries 
the  English  House  of  Commons  had  made  repeated  ef- 
forts to  take  control  of  foreign  affairs,  and  when  the  first 
American  government  was  instituted  such  control  was 
given  to  Congress;  but  in  both  countries  it  was  presently 
obvious  to  those  who  studied  the  matter  that,  conditions 
being  what  they  were,  secrecy  was  necessary  for  the 
proper  conduct  of  foreign  relations,  which  was  impossible 
if  they  were  communicated  to  a  large  legislative  as- 
sembly; and  that  such  business  could  only  be  transacted 
effectively  if  left  to  the  management  of  a  small  number  of 
experienced  and  expert  men. 

More  immediately  troublesome  was  the  question  of  the 
"freedom  of  the  seas."  This  was  a  cry  which  had  been 
raised  by  the  Germans  during  the  war,  and  from  them 
taken  up  by  pacifists  and  idealists  everywhere,  who  believed 


For  an 

enduring 

peace 


Control  of 

foreign 

affairs 


"Freedom 
of  the  Seas" 


502 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Militarism 

and 

navalism 


A  league  of 
nations 


The  Con- 
gress of 
Paris,  1919 


that  there  ought  not  to  be  any  mihtarism  or  force  either 
on  sea  or  on  land.  Actually,  however,  the  application  of 
such  a  doctrine  would  principally  affect  Great  Britain  and 
the  British  Empire,  whose  principal  strength  and  sole 
reliance  was  naval  power,  Britain  had  won  her  wars  and 
become  great  through  power  on  the  sea,  and  her  strength 
there  was  so  great  that  she  had  long  been  mistress  of  the 
seas.  But  it  was  generally  admitted  that  she  had  not 
abused  this  power,  and  in  time  of  peace  had  not  for  a 
great  while  interfered  with  other  nations  upon  the  waters. 
In  time  of  war  she  had  not  seldom  exerted  her  sea-power 
with  decisive  effect;  but  it  was  owing  to  this  very  agency 
that  the  Allies  had  been  able  to  resist  Germany  with 
any  success,  and  British  sea-power  had  been  the  corner- 
stone of  their  alliance.  It  was  certain  that  the  British 
people  would  regard  any  attempt  to  deprive  them  of  it  as 
a  thrust  at  their  very  existence. 

With  respect  to  what  was  being  called  a  league  of 
nations,  a  long  line  of  men,  from  Henry  IV  of  France  and 
William  Penn  to  Tsar  Alexander  I  and  Tsar  Nicholas  II, 
had  hoped  for  such  a  thing;  and  many  a  plan  had  been 
suggested  for  it;  but  so  far  the  perplexity  of  the  problem 
had  baffled  all  who  attempted  to  solve  it. 

The  Congress  of  Paris,  which  assembled  January  18, 
1919,  began  its  work  amidst  unparalleled  popular  interest 
and  in  the  midst  of  popular  expectations  that  no  assembly 
could  have  fulfilled.  By  the  time  its  first  session  opened 
idealists,  pacifists,  humanitarians,  and  a  vast  number  of 
others  who  were  enthusiastic  but  ill-informed,  had  come 
to  believe  that  such  a  peace  treaty  was  about  to  be  made 
and  such  a  settlement  of  the  affairs  of  the  world,  that  all 
the  damage  done  by  the  war  would  be  amended,  yet  little 
or  nothing  taken  from  Austria-Hungary  and  the  German 
Empire;  that  the  Allies  would  be  made  content,  yet  the 
Central  Powers  in  no  wise  offended ;  that  reparation  should 
be  made,  yet  no  indemnities  taken ;  that  self-determination 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       503 


of  peoples  would  be  recognized,  yet  Germain'  and  Austria 
not  be  shorn  of  their  possessions;  and  they  believed  now 
that  open  tliplomaey  would  be  estaljlished,  democracy  and 
the  welfare  of  the  masses,  that  there  would  be  freedom  of 
the  seas,  no  more  war,  and  a  league  of  nations  with  good 
feeling  and  the  brotherhood  of  men.  lie  who  seemeil  to 
represent  the  possibility  of  all  of  these  aspirations  was 
President  Wilson.  As  he  visited  London,  Paris,  and  Rome 
he  was  received  with  an  acclaim  such  as  no  American  in 
Europe  ever  had  had.  In  the  estimate  of  the  people  he 
was  the  foremost  leader  and  citizen  in  the  world.  On  the 
other  hand,  a  smaller  number,  though  not  a  few,  with 
better  knowledge  of  affairs  and  of  what  had  been  done  in 
the  past,  predicted  that  some  of  the  proposals  current  were 
irreconcilable  and  others  impossible  of  fulfilment,  that  the 
procedure  of  the  Congress  must  of  necessity  be  much 
like  what  had  taken  place  at  Vienna  and  Berlin,  that  the 
principal  business  would  be  to  settle  the  questions  which 
the  Great  War  had  brought  forth,  and  that  with  respect 
to  the  grander  and  more  general  schemes  the  utmost 
possible  was  for  the  best  men  to  try  earnestly  and  in  good 
faith  to  solve  some  part  of  the  difficulties  which  had  re- 
mained insoluble  so  long. 

From  the  countries  which  had  participated  in  the  war 
against  the  Central  Powers  came  delegates  to  the  Confer- 
ence at  Paris.  There  was  to  be  made  a  treaty  which, 
when  ready,  would  be  submitted  to  Germany  at  Versailles, 
and  others  that  would  be  offered  to  her  recent  allies. 
Neither  Germany  nor  her  allies  were  to  take  part  in  the 
discussion  nor  the  framing  of  the  treaties,  which  were  to 
be  submitted  merely  for  acceptance  or  rejection.  From 
January  to  May  the  delegates  and  their  advisers  deliber- 
ated on  the  matters  before  them. 

Some  of  the  more  important  matters  were  quickly 
decided.  The  great  decisions  were  not  arrived  at  openly 
or  with  the  knowledge  of  the  entire  Conference.     The  very 


Generous 
idealism 


Personnel 


Procedure 


504 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  council 
of  f  oxir 


Questions 
to    be    dealt 
with:  the 
conquered 
powers 


temperament  of  President  Wilson  was  such  that  he  easily 
acceded  to  what  was  doubtless  the  only  workable  scheme: 
important  affairs  were  first  decided  by  the  representatives 
of  the  five  greatest  powers,  the  British  Empire,  France, 
Italy,  Japan,  and  the  United  States;  after  which  they  were 
made  known  to  the  other  members  of  the  Congress. 
Actually  the  principal  work  was  always  in  the  hands  of 
four  men,  Mr.  George,  M.  Clemenceau,  Signor  Orlando, 
prime  ministers  respectively  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
France,  and  Italy,  and  President  Wilson.  The  question 
of  the  freedom  of  the  seas  was  soon  dropped,  and  wisely, 
as  competent  critics  had  hoped  and  predicted  beforehand. 
With  respect  to  the  reduction  of  armaments  little  was 
done;  the  defeated  powers  were  to  be  compelled  to  dimin- 
ish theirs  and  it  was  hoped  that  others  would  be  able  later 
to  do  likewise.  None  the  less,  there  remained  numerous 
difficult  questions  to  be  settled,  which  were  all  the  more 
perplexing  because  this  time,  unlike  what  had  taken  place 
at  Vienna  and  Berlin,  the  framers  of  the  treaty  would  make 
an  honest  effort  to  face  the  difficulties  and  settle  them, 
not  evade  them  by  some  specious  or  convenient  solution. 
First  among  the  matters  to  be  dealt  with  was  the 
question  of  the  treatment  of  the  conquered  powers. 
Some,  who  professed  to  be  the  prophets  of  a  new  era, 
declared  that  a  peace  of  vengeance  would  only  lead  to  new 
wars,  and  that  mild  treatment,  or,  as  they  called  it,  just 
treatment,  which  would  not  offend  Germany  and  her 
friends  but  leave  them  content,  was  the  only  way  to  spare 
succeeding  generations  from  the  horrors  that  had  blasted 
the  present.  Some  of  these  people  in  the  Allied  countries, 
like  Lenine  and  Trotzky  in  Russia,  proclaimed  that  there 
must  be  no  annexations  and  no  indemnities.  A  larger 
number  said  that  Germany  and  Austria  must  repair  the 
devastation  they  had  wrought  in  the  invaded  countries, 
but  that  was  all.  There  were  not  a  few  who  asserted  that 
the  people  of  the  Teutonic  countries  were  little,  if  any. 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       505 


more  to  be  blamed  than  the  others,  since  it  was  tlie  ^reed  of 
imperialists  and  capitalists,  and  the  rashness  of  diplo- 
mats working  in  secret,  which  had  brought  on  the  war, 
and  these  baneful  influences  had  been  strong  in  all  the 
countries  concerned.  On  the  other  hand  were  a  great 
many  who  had  come  to  fear  and  to  hate  the  (iermans  more 
than  any  people  for  generations  had  been  hated.  They 
declared  that  Germany  and  her  allies  must  be  stri[)ped  to 
the  uttermost  to  pay  for  the  infinite  woe  they  had  caused. 
It  was  vain,  they  said,  to  try  to  conciliate  such  people  by 
mild  treatment;  an  enduring  peace  could  be  obtained,  if 
at  all,  only  by  so  reducing  her  power  that  Germany  could 
not  make  unprovoked  attacks  in  the  future.  Some  of 
these  advocates  proposed  that  to  France  should  be  given 
German  territory  down  to  the  Rhine,  and  that  Germany 
should  be  compelled  to  pay  the  entire  cost  of  the  war. 
This  last  was  obviously  impossible.  The  war  had 
cost  the  Allies  more  than  $120,000,000,000,  perhaps 
$200,000,000,000,  including  all  indirect  losses;  but  the 
total  wealth  remaining  to  the  Gennan  Empire  w^as  per- 
haps not  more  than  $50,000,000,000 

The  question  of  the  German  colonies  attracted  less 
attention.  Some  declared  that  they  ought  under  no 
circumstances  to  be  taken  away,  since  the  Germans  needed 
colonial  possessions;  they  had  never  had  their  fair  share, 
and  this  was  one  of  the  causes  of  the  war.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  was  vehemently  asserted  that  the  Germans  had 
most  cruelly  misused  the  native  populations,  and  w^ere 
unworthy  to  be  entrusted  with  ruling  them  any  longer. 

The  question  of  Alsace-Lorraine  was  not  really  before 
the  Conference,  since  the  French  had  already  occupied 
the  provinces,  and  were  not  willing  to  discuss  the  matter 
further.  They  said  they  were  merely  taking  back  what 
had  once  been  wrested  from  them.  But  the  whole  ques- 
tion was  very  complicated,  and  had  already  been  a  great 
deal  discussed.     There  could  be  no  doubt  that  while  a 


Leniency 
and  severity 
urged 


The  German 
colonies 


Alsace- 
Lorraine 


506 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


A 

debatable 

land 


The  Italian 
frontier 


Italians  and 
Jugo-Slavs 


portion  of  the  people  in  Lorraine  were  French,  most  of  the 
rest  were  Germans.  The  districts  had  long  been  attached 
to  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  of  the  Germans,  from  which 
they  were  taken  mostly  by  force  by  the  French,  under 
Louis  XIV  and  Louis  XV.  On  the  other  hand,  this  terri- 
tory had  originally  been  part  of  a  middle  kingdom  be- 
tween Germany  and  France,  which  had  presently  fallen  to 
pieces.  There  was  also  no  doubt  that,  after  their  in- 
corporation into  the  kingdom  of  France,  the  people  of  the 
provinces  became  strongly  attached  to  the  French  Govern- 
ment, took  prominent  part  in  the  French  Revolution,  and 
thoroughly  shared  in  the  development  of  French  nation- 
ality then,  so  that  in  1871  they  were  most  unwilling  to  be 
taken  by  Germany  from  France.  The  question  was  further 
complicated  because  of  the  great  strategic  importance 
of  the  country,  in  the  hands  of  either  Germany  or  France, 
and  because  in  Lorraine  lay  the  most  valuable  iron-ore 
deposits  in  Europe. 

The  question  of  the  Italian  frontier  seemed  relatively 
simple,  though,  in  the  end,  it  proved  difficult  to  arrange. 
It  was  generally  conceded  that  Italia  Irredenta  should  be 
taken  from  the  broken  Dual  Monarchy,  but  the  extent  of  the 
lands  to  be  taken  proved  difficult  to  settle.  There  was  no 
doubt  about  the  Trentino,  nor  about  Trieste,  though  that 
port  was  Austria's  sole  outlet  to  the  sea;  but  all  down  the 
Dalmatian  coast,  on  the  eastern  side  of  the  Adriatic,  were 
old  Italian  towns  and  a  fringe  of  Italian  population,  while 
the  great  mass  of  the  people,  in  the  country  behind,  were 
South  Slavs.  The  islands  and  the  seaport  districts  were, 
indeed,  largely  unredeemed  Italian  land,  but  if  they  were 
all  given  to  Italy  then  an  outlying  fringe  of  Italians  would 
shut  off  from  the  sea  a  far  greater  number  of  Jugo-Slavs. 
Actually,  because  of  the  broad  untracked  Dinaric  Alps, 
just  back  from  the  coast,  the  South  Slavic  people  would  be 
effectually  shut  off  from  the  sea  if  they  did  not  obtain 
Fiume,  inhabited  mainly  by  Italians. 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       507 


The  question  of  the  (Czechs  and  the  Slovaks  had  not 
until  recently  been  much  discussed,  but  became  promi- 
nent just  before  peace  was  made.  Bohemia  and  Moravia, 
which  had  been  independent  kingdoms  in  the  ^Middle  Ages, 
then  joined  under  one  ruler,  were  united  with  Austria  in 
1526,  the  same  year  that  part  of  Hungary  also  was  joined 


The  Czechs 


< 

G  E  R  M  A  N  y\ 


^ 


Ajkrainia 

\ 


\ 


\ 


\ 


4^ 


-\. 


AUSTRI  a/'"'^^^^  ^. 

■''       HUNGARY    < 

r   R   U  M  A   N    I    A 

y 

j 

^ I 


■ — '\ 

Scale  of  Mile* 


32.    CZECHO-SLOVAKIA 


with  Austria.  The  people  were  mostly  West  Slavs,  and  a 
body  of  their  near  kinsmen,  the  Slovaks,  lived  just  to  the  -phe  Slovaks 
east  in  Hungary.  The  Slovaks  had  remained  a  back- 
ward people,  but  the  Czechs  and  Moravians  had  an  old 
culture  of  which  they  were  proud;  and  during  the  nine- 
teenth century  they  had  revived  a  strong  national  feeling. 
They  had  not  desired  independence  so  much  as  autonomy. 


508 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Poland 


The  greater 
Poland  of 
old 


but  in  1867  they  had  seen  the  Dual  Monarchy  established 
in  which  only  the  Germans  and  the  Magyars  were  to  rule. 
Accordingly,  discontent  had  increased,  and  during  the  Great 
War  their  troops  deserted  the  Austrian  armies  whenever 
they  could.  A  body  of  Czecho-Slovak  troops,  which  had 
surrendered  to  the  Russians,  had  just  taken  a  conspicuous 
part  in  resisting  the  Bolsheviki. 

The  question  of  Poland  had  been  much  discussed,  and  it 
had  evoked  a  great  deal  of  interest.  The  tragic  fate  of  the 
Polish  people  had  for  some  generations  aroused  deepest 
sympathy  among  the  statesmen  of  western  Europe  and 
among  liberals  all  over  the  world.  To  reestablish  Poland 
had  long  seemed  a  most  desirable  act  of  international 
justice,  but  the  difficulties  in  the  way  were  so  insu^ 
perable  that  a  new  Polish  state  was  outside  the  cal- 
culations of  practical  statesmen.  By  the  strangest  of 
coincidences,  all  three  of  the  powers  that  had  once 
divided  Poland  were  ruined  by  the  war.  At  the  very 
beginning  of  the  struggle  the  Russian  Government,  allied 
with  the  Western  Powers,  had  promised  the  Poles 
autonomy,  under  the  tsar.  Then  the  country  had  been 
conquered  by  the  Teutons;  Russia  had  been  ruined  and  the 
tsar  was  dead.  Now,  at  last,  the  Teutonic  powers  them- 
selves were  prostrate.  There  was  little  difference  of 
opinion  about  the  reconstitution  of  Poland,  but  much 
difficulty  in  determining  what  the  boundaries  should  be. 
In  former  times  Poland  had  greatly  extended  her  borders 
so  that  Polish  population  was  widely  scattered  and  mixed 
in  with  other  peoples.  Therefore  it  was  not  possible 
to  fix  boundaries  that  would  include  all  the  Poles  and 
not  many  Germans,  Lithuanians,  and  others,  or  such 
boundaries  as  would  include  only  Poles  without  leaving  a 
great  many  of  them  outside  the  new  state.  Moreover, 
Poland  had  formerly  extended  to  the  Baltic.  If  now  she 
were  given  her  outlet  to  the  sea  at  Danzig,  then  Prussia 
would  be  divided  into  two  parts. 


33.     THE  BALKANS  IN  1920 


510 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Jugo- 
slavs 


The  question  of  the  South  Slavs  presented  no  funda- 
mental difficulty.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the  Jugo- 
slavs formerly  oppressed  in  the  southern  districts  of 
Austria  and  Hungary,  the  people  of  the  provinces  of 
Carniola,  Croatia,  Slavonia,  Dalmatia,  Bosnia,  and 
Herzegovina,  should  be  given  their  freedom,  and  there 


SXRINTHIA      ] 


H    U 


RUMANIA 


34.    JUGO-SLAVIA 


Projected 
union  of 
them  all 


was  already  a  movement  on  foot  to  have  them  all  unite 
with  their  kinsmen  of  Montenegro  and  Servia  in  a  large 
Jugo-Slavic  state.  It  would  undoubtedly  be  difficult  to 
hold  in  one  union  these  people,  of  the  same  race  indeed, 
but  differing  much  in  culture  and  religion.  The  im- 
mediate difficulty,  however,  was  to  reconcile  conflicting 
ambitions  of  Italians  and  South  Slavs  on  the  Adriatic 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       511 


coast,  and  assure   the  now   fe(Jerution   an   outlet  to   the 
sea. 

The  question  of  Constantinople  and  the  Turkish  Empire 
presented  such  enormous  difficulties  that  for  the  most 
part  it  was  postponed  as  lon^  as  could  be.  Many  thought 
it  well  to  take  from  the  Turks  all  their  possessions  except 
Anatolia  in  Asia  Minor,  their  real  home,  and  then  free  the 
subjects  whom  they  had  so  misruled  or  distribute  the 
territories  among  Britain,  France,  Itidy,  and  (ireece.  But 
Constantinople,  as  always,  was  so  mighty  a  prize  that  there 
was  no  agreement  as  to  who  should  have  it,  and  some 
thought  the  best  solution  was  to  let  the  Turks  still  remain. 

Since  the  proceedings  of  the  inner  council  of  the  Congress 
of  Paris  were  largely  secret,  the  greatest  matters  being 
settled,  as  at  Vienna,  in  private  meetings  between  the 
great  men,  the  motives  and  procedure  that  prevailed  will 
long  be  partly  the  subject  of  conjecture.  It  is  believed 
that  at  opposite  extremes  were  President  Wilson  and 
Premier  Clemenceau.  The  American  statesman  stood 
for  the  high  ideals  and  the  liberal  ideas  which  the  long 
struggle  had  quickened  in  the  hearts  of  the  best  people, 
but  he  seems  to  have  been  without  great  knowledge  of 
European  statecraft  and  conditions,  and  often  hampered 
by  insufficient  information.  He  stood  first  for  justice. 
He  beheved  that  an  enduring  peace  could  best  be  obtained 
by  liberal  terms.  He  desired,  above  all,  that  the  present 
opportunity  for  establishing  a  league  of  nations  should 
not  be  allowed  to  pass,  so  that  governments  might  there- 
after settle  their  differences  by  reason  and  justice,  and 
not  by  war.  The  aged  French  premier  was  wise  with  the 
wisdom  of  long  experience  and  service.  Apparently  he  had 
none  too  great  faith  in  a  league  of  nations,  but  was  willing 
to  assist  in  establishing  one,  provided  that  he  was  able 
to  assure  the  safety  of  France  for  the  future.  Twice  in  his 
life  had  France  been  invaded  by  the  Germans  and  terribly 
ravaged,  and  now  he  was  resolved  upon  measures  so  stern 


Constan- 
tinople and 
Turkey 


Business  of 
the  Con- 
gress 


Clemenceau 


512 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Treaty 
of  Versailles 


The 
Covenant 


that  it  would  not  be  likely  to  happen  again.  In  be- 
tween these  two  were  the  Italian  premier,  with  no  very- 
striking  policy  aside  from  Italy's  interests,  it  would  seem, 
and  Mr.  Lloyd  George,  one  of  the  great  liberal  leaders 
of  the  world,  who  had  been  very  near  to  the  horror  and 
tragedy  of  the  conflict,  and  who  now  used  his  matchless 
skill  in  reconciling  the  divergent  views  of  Clemenceau  and 
AVilson. 

May  7,  the  Treaty  having  been  drawn  up  was  pre- 
sented to  the  German  representatives  at  Versailles.  Their 
leader  made  a  dramatic  declaration  for  his  country,  not 
without  eloquence  and  pathos,  acknowledging  Germany's 
defeat,  but  declaring  that  not  the  German  people  alone  but 
the  old  system  of  European  imperialism  was  responsible  for 
the  coming  of  the  war.  June  28  the  Treaty  was  signed. 
In  a  document  as  long  as  an  ordinary  book  the  affairs 
of  Germany,  Europe,  and  the  world  were  settled,  it  was 
thought,  for  the  time. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Treaty  of  Versailles,  and  a  part 
of  it,  was  the  Covenant,  or  agreement,  of  a  League  of 
Nations  designed  *'to  promote  international  cooperation, 
and  to  achieve  international  peace  and  security, 
through  open,  just,  and  honorable  international  relations." 
At  first  the  members  of  the  League  were  to  be  the  powers 
now  signing  the  treaty,  while  the  remaining  South 
American  states  and  the  neutral  countries  of  Europe  were 
invited  to  join.  The  seat  of  the  League  was  to  be  Geneva. 
It  was  to  act  through  an  assembly  in  which  each  member 
was  to  have  one  vote,  and  a  council,  consisting  of  members 
representing  the  greater  powers.  The  particular  business 
of  the  Council  was  to  be  the  planning  a  reduction  of  arma- 
ments "to  the  lowest  point  consistent  with  safety,"  and 
especially  the  taking  of  measures  for  preventing  war.  If 
there  arose  any  dispute  which  threatened  war  it  must  be 
submitted  to  arbitration  or  inquiry  by  the  Council,  nor  in 
any  case  should  there  be  resort  to  war  until  three  months 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920 


;i3 


after  decision,  which  must  be  rendered  witliin  a  reasonable 
time.  If  a  member  of  the  League  resorted  to  war  in  defi- 
ance of  these  provisions,  he  was  to  be  regarded  as  commit- 
ting an  act  of  war  against  all  the  members  of  the  League, 
who  should  sever  relations  with  him  and  take  measures  to 
enforce  the  agreement.  It  was  further  provided  that 
members  should  abrogate  all  treaties  inconsistent  with 
the  provisions  of  the  League,  and  that  all  other  treaties 
and  engagements  should  be  published.  Article  10  pro- 
vided that,  "The  ^Members  of  the  League  undertake  to 
respect  and  preserve  as  against  external  aggression  tlie 
territorial  integrity  and  existing  political  independence  of 
all  Members  of  the  League.  In  case  of  any  such  aggres- 
sion or  in  case  of  any  threat  or  danger  of  such  aggression, 
the  Council  shall  advise  upon  the  means  by  which  this 
obligation  shall  be  fulfilled."  This  was  afterward  the 
object  of  much  criticism  as  a  provision  to  keep  things  as 
they  were,  and  make  impossible  necessary  revolution  and 
change,  much  as  had  been  said  of  the  Holy  Alliance  a 
century  before;  but  it  was  difficult  to  see  how  such  a  pro- 
vision could  be  dispensed  with,  and  it  \\as  hoped  that 
proper  changes  would  be  brought  about,  when  necessary, 
by  voluntary  action  of  the  League  or  its  members. 
Another  article  of  vast  possibilities  for  good,  but  compli- 
cated with  great  difficulties  also,  proclaimed  that  the  mem- 
bers should  secure  fair  and  humane  labor  conditions  every- 
where, control  traflSc  in  women  and  children,  in  opium  and 
other  drugs,  in  arms  and  ammunition,  and  give  just  treat- 
ment to  native  populations.  That  this  Covenant  contained 
defects  was  not  to  be  doubted,  and  many  objections 
were  easily  raised  against  it.  But  it  was  evident  that 
numerous  objections  might  always  be  made  with  respect 
to  any  great  constructive  effort  involving  changes,  as  had 
been  the  case  with  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  the  great  reforms  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion, the  passing  of   the   British  electoral   reform   laws, 


Article  10 


Article  23 


514 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Treaty 
with  Ger- 
many 


Germany's 
losses 


and  the  emancipation  of  the  serfs  in  Russia.  Whatever 
its  defects,  many  people  beheved  that  here  was  at  least  an 
honest  attempt  to  make  the  world  better,  a  scheme  that 
would  be  altered  and  improved  as  the  result  of  experience 
and  in  the  course  of  time,  if  people  tried  their  best  to  make 
it  succeed,  instead  of  merely  raising  objections  to  it. 

This  Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations  was  the 
first  part  of  the  Treaty  with  Germany.  By  other  pro- 
visions Alsace-Lorraine  was  restored  to  France,  a  small 
district  to  Belgium,  and  to  Poland  a  small  portion  of 
Silesia  and  the  greater  part  of  Posen  and  West  Prussia. 
Germany  was  to  renounce  her  agreements  with  Belgium 
and  Luxemburg;  she  was  to  yield  to  France  the  coal  mines 
of  the  Saar  Basin,  on  the  French  frontier,  in  compen- 
sation for  the  wanton  and  terrible  destruction  of  the 
French  coal  mines  about  Lens,  this  district  to  be  admin- 
istered by  the  League  of  Nations  for  fifteen  years,  the 
people  of  the  district  to  determine  after  that  time  whether 
it  should  continue  under  the  League,  or  be  returned  to 
Germany,  or  united  with  France.  Germany  lost  thus  more 
than  35,000  square  miles,  a  sixth  of  her  former  area,  and 
about  7,000,000  of  her  population.  Whereas  in  1914  she 
had  an  area  of  207,000  square  miles  and  a  population  of 
68,000,000,  by  the  Treaty  of  Versailles  she  was  reduced 
to  about  170,000  square  miles  and  about  60,000,000  of 
people.  Furthermore,  East  Prussia  was  now  left  separated 
from  the  remainder  of  Germany  by  a  "corridor"  of  Po- 
lish territory  extending  to  the  Baltic  Sea,  while  Danzig 
was  made  a  free  city  under  the  guarantee  of  the  League 
of  Nations.  These  losses,  perhaps,  were  not  in  them- 
selves so  severe  as  was  the  taking  of  so  much  of  Germany's 
resources  in  coal  and  iron-ore  and  other  materials,  which 
lay  in  the  territories  ceded.  In  the  districts  surrendered 
to  Poland  and  to  France  were  a  considerable  part  of  the 
resources  upon  which  Germany's  industrial  greatness  had 
been   founded  and  also  her  military   strength.     It  was 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       515 


possible  thus  that  preeminence  in  Europe  luul  passed  in- 
definitely from   her. 

Germany  was  required  to  abrogate  the  Treaty  of  Brest- 
Litov'sk,  which  she  had  forced  on  Russia;  she  was  to  recog- 
nize the  independence  of  Austria,  of  Czecho-Slovakia, 
and  of  Pohind,  the  new  slates  now  being  estabhshed; 
leave  the  fate  of  the  Danish  country  once  taken  from 
Denmark  to  be  decided  by  the  j)eople  themsehes,  and 
destroy  the  fortifications  of  the  fortress  of  Helgoland. 
Outside  of  Europe  she  was  to  renounce  all  her  possessions: 
her  colonies,  her  rights  in  China,  Siam,  Lil^eria,  and 
Morocco;  cede  her  rights  in  Shantung  to  Japan,  and 
recognize  the  British  protectorate  over  Egypt.  She  was 
to  abolish  conscription,  and  limit  her  army  to  100,000  men, 
her  navy  to  a  few  small  ships,  with  no  sul^marines,  her 
warships  being  surrendered  to  the  Allies,  and  she  was  to 
have  no  airplanes  for  purposes  of  war.  She  was  also  for- 
bidden to  keep  any  fortresses  within  a  zone  of  territory 
extending  from  her  frontier  to  fifty  kilometers,  east  of  the 
Rhine. 

The  Treaty  declared  that  the  war  had  been  forced  upon 
the  Allies  by  German  aggression.  To  repair  the  damage 
and  losses  caused  to  them  Germany  was  to  pay  an 
indemnity  of  which  the  amount  was  to  be  fixed  later  on, 
in  accordance  with  Germany's  ability  to  pay;  but 
$5,000,000,000  was  to  be  paid  by  May  1,  1921,  twice  that 
amount  in  the  five  years  following,  and  $10,000,000,000 
still  later.  Subsequently  attempt  was  made  to  fix  the 
total  at  $30,000,000,000,  and  on  another  occasion  at 
$55,000,000,000.  Germany  was  to  replace  ton  for  ton  the 
merchant  ships  destroyed  in  the  war,  and  she  was  to 
undertake  the  restoration  of  the  areas  devastated  by  her 
armies  of  invasion.  The  Kiel  Ganal  and  certain  rivers 
of  Germany  were  to  be  opened  to  free  navigation. 

This  Treaty,  which  according  to  some  was  the  most 
terrible  doom  ever  imposed  upon  any  nation  since  the 


Destruction 
of  German 
military 
power 


The  indem- 
nity 


516 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Character 
of  the 
Treaty 


Treaty  of  St. 
Germain 
with  Austria, 
1919 


time  when  Rome  conquered  Carthage,  was  viewed  with 
dismay  by  others  as  not  sufficiently   binding  Germany 
as  to  make  impossible  another  aggression,  and  by  no 
means  commensurate  with   the   evil    and    suffering   she 
had  caused.     There  was  no  doubt  that  the  provisions  of 
the  settlement  reduced  Germany  to  poverty  and  weakness. 
It  took  from  the  generation  of  Germans  who  accepted  it 
the  very  hope  of  prosperity  and  greatness  such  as  they  had 
known  before  1914.     But  there  was  also  no  doubt  that 
the  people  of  England,   Italy,   and   France,   despite  all 
indemnities  that  Germany  could   pay,   would  for  gene- 
rations remain  crushed  under  burdens  of  taxation  such  as 
they  had  never  known   before,  made  necessary  by  ex- 
penditures caused  by  the  war.     Severe  as  the  terms  were 
they  were  far  less  terrible  than  the  Germans  had,  in  their 
moments  of   triumph,  boastfully   proclaimed   that   they 
would  impose.     The  indemnity  required  was  not  plun- 
der, but  merely  compensation  for  the  ruin  that  Germans 
had  wrought;  and  the  reparation  thus  made  would  be 
very   incomplete.     The  terms  of   disarmament  imposed 
made  the  beginning,  it  was  to  be  hoped,  of  general  re- 
duction of  armaments,  which  the  people  of  the  democratic 
countries  had  long  much  desired.     The  populations  sur- 
rendered were  largely  Polish  or  Danish  and  partly  French, 
and  the  territories  now  to  be  given  up  had  all  previously 
been  taken  away  from  Poland  or  Denmark  or  France. 
The  results  of  the  war  being  what  they  were,  and  the  evil 
conditions  which  had  come  from  the  war  being  so  great 
as  they  were,  the  peace  was  probably  as  good  a  one  as 
in  the  circumstances  was  to  be  made.     All  in  all,  it  had 
not  been  formulated  in  a  spirit  of  hatred  or  revenge,  nor 
with  desire  to  destroy  the  German  people. 

With  the  allies  of  Germany  separate  treaties  were  made. 
As  a  result  of  the  war  Austria-Hungary  had  fallen  to 
pieces.  From  the  ruins  had  arisen  Czecho-Slovakia,  and 
the  state  of  the  Serbs,  Croats,  and  Slovenes,  whose  in- 


.Washinglon  l.fgr.) 
iBr.)  Ch,lstm«  r.^^""'"«  '■  «"•' 
Phoenix  Ir.       "Jarvis  l.(«r.) 

,  •"•  (S')  .Starbuck  I.  {Br.) 

Umon.is.  •  .Ptnrhyr.  I  ie,.i     :..  Marquesas  Is. 

Danger  I    .    r^i,^       ,   .•c.-ollr,  lU,  ) 
'Nassau  I.    ..      I.(9,,|         Manihik.  t«  iflr.l 

nJAToi'\t.'   So*'e°;i5"v;,'7-^;,-    Tuamo.uor 
»j.ai;K  I  .(flr  >  '.'.Hervey  or  ■>*:    ''  '*  '-O'''  Archipelago 

;'-Tonga  «.„,  •  „Cook  Is.       "     -i'  -• 
Friendly  IS-'llIVn*'.)    '.V'l'iHs.'  •  .Ouclel.(«r.) 

'*'■'  Oparo  I  («'■')"•''•'•'''•■    ?'"""'•'*'•'  •     •=^="-l'°'""" 

OCEAX 


OCEAN 


Gough  I 


^^  («'  I  British  Empire 

tM(»*i   OBfifTiNG  CO  iilC  N  T 


V  i     ^'  f 

alkland  Is 

'■S 

'"'■'                ^  South  Georgia  (Sr  ) 

-      Sandwich 
Group 

South  Shetlands  -  ■ 

(Sr  1            ,  * 

"'South  Orkneys 

,                            (»r) 

35.    THE  BRITIS 


■2i 


;mpire  in  1920 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1IJ20       .517 


dependence  the  Allies  hud  acknowledged.  Accordingly, 
the  Dual  Monarchy  had  ceased  to  exist.  With  Austria 
and  with  Hungary  arrangements  were  made  which  stipu- 
lated that  the  Treaty  of  Brest-Litovsk  should  he  re- 
nounced and  also  rights  in  Egypt,  Morocco,  Siam,  and 
China;  the  navy  should  be  surrendered,  and  an  indemnity 
paid.  No  state  suffered  more  fearful  fate  than  Austria- 
Hungary.  Austria,  once  the  leading  state  in  Europe,  and 
long  the  principal  member  of  the  Dual  Monarchy,  which 
in  1914  had  a  population  of  51,000,000  and  an  area  of 
260,000  square  miles,  was  now  reduced  to  the  petty  inland 
state  of  German  Austria,  with  40,000  square  miles  and  a 
population  of  9,000,000.  The  splendid  old  capital,  Vienna, 
left  with  too  little  territory  to  support  its  greatness,  soon 
became  a  sad,  .shunned,  famine-stricken  place,  while  the 
Austrian  people,  because  of  the  destruction  and  rav- 
ages of  the  war,  and  because  their  former  economic  con- 
nections had  been  severed,  were  soon  in  such  terrible 
straits  that  they  had  no  recourse  but  to  beseech  the 
charity  of  the  world.  By  a  later  treaty  Hungary  likewise 
was  bereft  of  much  of  her  territory  and  all  of  the  non- 
Magyar  populations  so  long  held  in  subjection.  She  also 
was  left  a  minor  inland  state,  of  35,000  sc{uare  miles,  con- 
taining 8,000,000  people;  and  she  was  soon  overrun  and 
plundered  by  Rumanian  armies,  which  now  took  terrible 
vengeance  for  the  a\\'ful  miseries  put  upon  their  people  two 
years  before.  With  Bulgaria  a  treaty  was  made  which 
imposed  upon  her  an  indemnity,  and  took  from  her  the 
territories  she  had  seized  from  Servia,  Rumania,  and 
Greece,  during  the  war,  while  the  disposition  of  the 
territory  gi\'ing  her  access  to  the  .^gean  was  to  be  decided 
by  plebiscite  of  the  local  population.  Bulgaria  was  left, 
therefore,  the  least  important  of  the  Balkan  States,  in  the 
midst  of  rivals  who  had  grown  great  by  the  war.  By  the 
Treaty  of  Sevres  (1920),  agreed  upon  after  much  difficulty 
and  dela\',  Turkey  was  stripped  of  most  of  her  possessions. 


The  Dual 
Monarchy 
already  in 
fragments 


Hungary 


Bulgaria 


Tiu-key 


518 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Ratification 
of  the  Treaty 
of  Versailles, 
1919-20 


The  United 
States  fails 
to  ratify 


Nominally  Constantinople  was  left  to  the  sultan,  but  the 
straits  were  internationalized,  the  European  territory  of 
the  Porte  was  given  mostly  to  Greece,  and  the  Ottoman 
dominions  in  Asia  were  largely  divided  among  Great 
Britain,  France,  Italy,  and  Greece. 

The  more  important  part  of  the  work  done  in  Paris  was 
the  treaty  with  Germany  embodying  the  Covenant  of  the 
League  of  Nations.  It  was  signed  at  Versailles,  June  28. 
A  few  days  later  it  was  ratified  by  the  German  Republic. 
At  the  end  of  July  it  was  ratified  by  Great  Britain  and  by 
Poland,  in  the  following  month  by  Belgium,  and  in  October 
by  the  British  dominions,  by  Italy,  and  by  France,  and  at 
the  end  of  December  by  Japan.  Meanwhile,  the  sur- 
rendered German  fleet,  which  had  been  interned  at  Scapa 
Flow,  in  the  Orkney  Islands,  north  of  Scotland,  having 
been  sunk  by  the  German  crews,  the  Supreme  Council 
issued  a  protocol  containing  provisions  for  making  good 
the  loss  by  surrender  of  additional  German  shipping. 
Considerable  negotiation  and  some  delay  followed,  but 
January  10,  1920,  the  protocol  having  been  accepted  by 
the  German  Government,  ratifications  were  exchanged  at 
Versailles  and  the  Treaty  put  into  effect.  On  this  day, 
then,  formally,  the  Great  War  came  to  an  end. 

In  the  ratification  the  United  States  took  no  part.  She 
had  exerted  enormous,  if  not  decisive,  power  in  the  later 
stages  of  the  war,  and  during  the  negotiations  in  Paris 
her  president  had  taken  a  prominent  part.  It  was  due 
particularly  to  his  efforts  that  a  League  of  Nations  had 
been  formed  and  the  Covenant  embodied  m  the  Treaty. 
But  he  had  been  unable  to  secure  its  ratification  by  his 
country.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  provided 
that  the  assent  of  two  thirds  of  the  Senate  was  necessary 
for  the  acceptance  of  any  treaty,  and  this  it  had  been  im- 
possible to  obtain.  All  sorts  of  objections  were  raised. 
The  extreme  idealists  and  reformers  believed  that  a  harsh 
and  evil  treaty  had  been  made,  and  that  this  was  sane- 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       519 


tioned  by  the  Covenant.  There  was  a  lar^e  number  of 
Americans  who  were  still  unwilling  to  have  their  country 
enter  into  close  relations  with  other  i)owers,  and  wished 
to  continue  the  old  isolation.  It  was  probable  that  most 
of  the  people  of  the  United  States  earnestly  desired  that 
some  sort  of  league  be  made  for  tlic  purpose  of  preventing 
wars  in  the  future.  But  a  considerable  number  of  senators 
refused  to  accept  the  Covenant  without  amendments  which 
the  president  was  unwilling  to  have  made,  so  the  Cove- 
nant was  not  accepted  and  the  treaty  with  Germany  not 
sanctioned. 

The  war  and  the  settlement  in  Paris  made  immense 
changes  in  European  relations  and  altered  the  map  of  the 
world  more  than  it  had  ever  been  changed  at  one  time 
before.  In  Europe  itself  France  became  again,  what  she 
had  once  been  for  so  long,  the  first  of  the  Continental 
powers.  A  great  number  of  her  best  men  had  been  killed 
and  her  resources  so  drained  that  she  was  now  left 
thoroughly  exhausted,  but  she  had  acquired  such  re- 
sources and  such  position  that  if  she  recovered  at  all  she 
would  most  probably  have  a  splendid  future  before  her, 
and  her  colonial  empire  remained  intact.  Italy  had  at  last 
got  the  "unredeemed  lands,"  the  head  of  the  Adriatic  at 
Trieste  and  also  the  outlet  of  the  Adriatic  by  establishing 
a  protectorate  over  Albania.  For  the  time,  at  least,  this 
sea  was  entirely  under  Italy's  domination.  Across  on  the 
other  side  was  the  new  Jugo-Slavic  state.  The  age-long 
enemy,  Austria,  had  been  removed  from  all  rivalry  in  the 
future.  Belgium,  slightly  enlarged,  and  enormously  en- 
hanced in  prestige,  at  once  began  to  recover  from  the 
disasters  which  had  fallen  upon  her. 

In  central  Europe  the  changes  were  greater.  The 
German  Empire  had  fallen  with  the  final  disasters  to  its 
armies  in  eastern  France,  just  as  fifty  years  before  the 
Second  French  Empire  had  been  overthrown  when  the 
news  of  Sedan  came  to  Paris.     Just  before  the  Germans 


Traditional 

American 

aloofness 


The  new 
era:  France 


Italy 


Belgium 


The  end  of 
the  German 
Empire, 
1918 


520  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

Flight  of  surrendered   there  were  outbreaks  in   many  places;  the 

the  Kaiser  kaiser  and  some  of  the  lesser  rulers  fled  from  the  country, 
socialist  republics  were  hastily  set  up,  and  in  Berlin  and 
especially  in  INIunich  there  were  communist  disorders  much 
like  those  of  Paris  in  1871.  For  a  moment  it  seemed  that 
Germany  was  about  to  split  mto  pieces  and  sink  into  the 
chaos  of  ruin  and  disorder  into  which  Russia  had  just 
gone  before  her.  But,  temporarily  at  least,  the  strong  and 
solid  qualities  of  the  German  people  reasserted  themselves ; 
the  disorders  were  suppressed;  the  separatist  movements 
checked;  and  in  place  of  the  German  Empire  there  pres- 
ently appeared  a  federation  of  republics  much  like  the 
United  States  of  America,  except  that  constitution  and 
organization  were  socialized,  less,  indeed,  than  in  Russia, 
but  more  thoroughly  than  anywhere  else  in  the  world. 
In  the  midst  of  national  disorganization  and  disaster, 
liable  for  an  indemnity  of  vast  and  indefinite  amount,  this 
government  maintained  itself  with  increasing  difiiculty. 
It  probably  had  the  support  of  most  of  the  German  people 
for  the  time,  but  in  any  event,  such  were  the  general 
conditions  existing,  it  would  probably  be  harder  to  uphold 
this,  new  government  than  it  had  been  to  perpetuate  that 
over  which  Thiers  had  presided  in  France.  This  Ger- 
man government,  under  President  Ebert,  was  constantly 
threatened  on  the  one  side  by  reactionaries  and  Junkers, 
who  hoped  to  see  the  older  forms  soon  restored,  and  on  the 
other  by  radicals  and  "Spartacides,"  as  the  extreme 
communists  were  called,  who  wanted  a  complete  revolution 
more  like  the  one  in  Russia.  It  would  be  some  years 
before  the  outcome  could  be  accurately  foretold. 
Position  of  The  German  state  was  vastly  reduced  in  power  and 

the  German      reputation;    its   old   industrial   prosperity   was   gone,    its 
Repubhc  commerce  had  vanished,  its  colonies  were  completely  lost. 

Most  of  its  European  territory  it  still  retained,  but  its  im- 
mensely important  districts  on  the  upper  Rhine  and  in 
Posen  were  gone,  and  with  them  great  stores  of  iron-ore 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1020 


)21 


and  coal.  If  the  parts  of  ihc  R(>[)ul)li('  rcniaiiicd  to^'clher 
through  the  lean  and  hard  years  to  come,  there  was  hope 
that  Germany  later  on  might  recover  and  grow  great 
once  more,  and,  next  to  France,  be  the  greatest  Conti- 
nental power,  or  in  the  end  even  recover  her  primacy  once 
more.     All  this  lay  hid  in  the  future. 

For  the  old  Dual  Monarchy  there  was  no  hope  of  a  better 
day.  In  what  had  been  the  realm  of  Austria-Hungary  the 
servants  of  other  days  had  become  masters,  and  set  up  for 
themselves.  In  the  north  was  Czecho-Slovakia,  with  its 
capital  at  Prague,  apparently  with  a  great  industrial 
future  before  it.  To  the  east  a  new  Poland  had  appeared, 
w^hich  might  later  be  one  of  the  strong  European  stales  if 
only  it  could  live  now  through  the  period  of  death-like 
weakness  in  which  war  and  famine  had  left  it.  To  the 
south,  on  the  western  side,  was  the  new  state  of  the  once- 
despised  South  Slavs,  with  Italy  holding  the  Adriatic; 
while  to  the  south  on  the  eastern  side  was  the  greater 
Rumania,  which  statesmen  had  so  often  dreamed  of, 
doubled  in  size  by  ha\ang  taken  Transylvania  from  the 
Magyars.  In  the  midst  of  these  newcomers  were  Hun- 
gary, poor  and  surrounded,  without  access  to  the  sea,  and 
with  uncertain  future,  and  Austria,  poorer  and  weaker, 
and  similarly  cut  off,  having,  perhaps,  as  her  greatest 
hope,  future  incorporation  with  Germany.  The  old  Dual 
Monarchy,  whatever  its  faults,  had  held  these  peoples 
together.  Now  economic  ties  were  severed  and  barriers 
erected,  so  that  hunger  and  misery  were  added  to  the 
desolation  of  the  war.  Here  the  principal  task  of  states- 
men would  be  to  bring  the  various  districts  into  economic 
association  once  more. 

The  greatest  changes  of  all  had  taken  place  in  eastern 
Europe.  Not  only  had  Russia  broken  to  pieces,  but  the 
lands,  first  ravaged  by  war,  had  in  the  end  gone  down  in  a 
revolution  so  fundamental  and  sweeping  that  its  outcome 
for  the  present  could  not  be  predicted.     It  was  to  be 


Austria  and 
Hungary 


Changes  in 
eastern 
Europe: 
Russia 


522 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Revolution 
in  Russia 


The  Slavs 


Africa  and 
Asia 


hoped  that  the  excesses  and  terror  of  the  time  of  change 
would  prove  to  be  the  things  least  striking  in  the  end,  and 
that  finally  it  would  be  seen  that  the  principal  result  of 
the  Russian  Revolution  was  the  breaking  of  an  obsolete 
and  oppressive  autocracy  and  a  great  betterment  of  the 
condition  of  the  Russian  people.  But  however  that  might 
be  in  the  end,  Russia  had,  for  the  time,  ceased  to  be  one  of 
the  Great  Powers  of  the  world.  All  the  outlying  parts 
had  dropped  off.  Finland,  the  Baltic  Provinces,  Poland, 
Bessarabia,  the  Ukraine,  the  Caucasus,  and  a  great  part  of 
Siberia,  It  might  be  that  all  of  these  countries  would 
later  on  be  brought  together  in  a  strong  federation,  though 
it  was  more  probable  that  the  Russian  Empire  of  the  days 
before  the  Great  War  was  not  to  appear  again ;  but  after 
the  e\nl  days  of  dissolution  and  weakness  the  Russians 
would  almost  certainly  take  their  place  among  the  principal 
nations  once  more. 

None  the  less,  the  standing  of  the  Slavic  peoples  in 
Europe  had  been  for  the  time  improved.  If  on  the  one 
hand  the  Russian  Empire  had  broken  to  pieces,  yet  the 
fragments  had  set  up  autonomous  governments,  and  on 
the  other  hand  the  Slavs  of  central  Europe,  so  long 
held  down  by  German  masters,  had  got  their  freedom. 
Whether  Poland,  lying  between  bolshevist  Russia  and  a 
vengeful  Germany,  could  maintain  herself,  even  with  the 
assistance  of  France,  remained  to  be  seen.  The  fate  of 
Czecho-Slovakia  also  lay  hidden  in  the  future.  The  new 
state  of  the  South  Slavs  would  certainly  encounter  most 
diflBcult  problems  in  holding  together  such  elements  as 
the  Serbs,  the  Croats,  and  the  Slovenes.  Yet  Poland, 
Czecho-Slovakia,  Jugo-Slavia,  and  also  Rumania  were  now 
established  as  considerable  states,  and  the  prospects  of 
the  West  and  the  South  Slavs  were  brighter  than  they  had 
been  for  five  hundred  years. 

Africa  had  fallen  practically  into  the  hands  of  Britain 
and  France.     In  Asia  all  the  northern  part  still  belonged 


THE    S E T T L E  M E  N T    OF    1020       52S 


to  Russia,  but  the  far  more  important  soutlicrn  part, 
all  of  it  from  Arabia  to  Malaysia,  was  now  under  the 
control  of  Great  Britain.  In  the  east  almost  all  the 
important  strategic  positions  and  approaches  to  China, 
from  Sakhalin  down  to  Formosa,  had  come  into  the  hands 
of  Japan. 

The  results  of  the  large  forces  at  work  in  the  modern 
world  and  also  now  the  results  of  the  Great  War  had  been 
the  formation  of  vast  empires,  nuich  as  huge  industrial 
combinations  had  appeared  in  the  business  world.  For 
a  chance  to  be  one  of  the  greater  empires  Germany  had 
struck  in  1914,  and  her  defeat  in  1918  had  for  the  present 
definitely  taken  from  her  the  possil)ility  of  obtaining  it. 
Russia,  if  she  recovered,  might  be  one  of  the  greatest, 
as  might  Japan  if  she  continued  her  remarkable  expansion 
and  success,  and  succeeded  in  her  aggressions  on  the  main- 
land. But  the  two  powers  now  indubitably  holding 
first  place  were  the  British  Empire  and  the  United  States. 
In  her  large  populaticm,  intelligent  and  ])rosperous,  in  her 
infinite  wealth,  her  inunense  resources,  the  United  States 
held  unrivalled  position.  But  more  imposing,  though  in- 
trinsically less  strong,  was  the  position  of  the  British 
Empire,  which  controlled  most  of  Africa,  and  a  great  part 
of  Asia.  Its  colonies,  its  naval  stations,  its  strategic  posi- 
tions were  everywhere.  Britain  was  mistress  of  tlie  seas, 
and  held  the  approaches  to  the  best  routes,  the  entrance  to 
the  Mediterranean,  all  the  environs  of  Suez,  and  virtually 
now  the  control  of  Constantinople.  Together  the  British 
Empire  and  the  United  States  held  assured  control  of  the 
seas,  and  had  in  their  keeping  so  great  a  part  of  all  the 
world's  wealth  and  resources,  so  large  a  part  of  all  of  the 
earth's  coal  and  iron,  tin  and  copper  and  gold,  so  nuicli  of 
its  meat  and  wheat  and  corn,  that  for  the  present  to  a 
great  extent  the  destiny  of  the  world  lay  in  their  keeping. 
Fortunate  it  might  seem  that  such  unparalleled  greatness 
and  wealth  had  come  to  the  peoples  which,  notwithstand- 


The  domi- 
nant powers 


Greatness 
of  the 
British 
Empire 


ing  peoples 


524  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

ing  many  errors,  had  most  cherished  democracy,  human- 
ity,  and  free   development.     The  best  of  the   Enghsh- 
speaking  peoples  might  well  be  humble  in  contemplation 
of  the  mighty  prospect  ahead. 
Solidarity  For  the  British  Empire  and  the  United  States  one  of  the 

of  the  Eng-  greatest  tasks  of  the  future  was  maintenance  of  friendship 
:l^„l!!!l^^I  and  cordial  relations  with  each  other.  Neither  of  them, 
probably,  could  be  overthrown  except  by  the  other. 
Together  their  safety  was  assured,  and  also  their  future 
position.  Their  people  spoke  the  same  tongue  and  dealt 
much  with  each  other;  hence  there  would  often  be  rivalry, 
some  ill-feeling,  minor  conflict,  and  many  disputes.  But 
the  people  of  the  United  Kingdom,  of  the  United  States, 
and  of  the  commonwealths  of  the  British  Empire  had  a 
common  inheritance  of  speech,  law,  governmental  system, 
character,  general  outlook.  And  for  some  time  an  in- 
creasing number  of  the  English-speaking  people  had  come 
to  believe  that  war  between  the  British  Empire  and  the 
United  States  was  inconceivable  and  outside  calculation. 
But  however  bright  the  future  of  the  most  fortunate 
debt     °  might  seem,  the  outlook  of  most  of  the  European  nations, 

and  even  their  present,  was  dark  indeed.  Seldom  had 
there  been  so  much  desolation  and  waste,  so  much  misery 
and  woe.  The  total  cost  of  the  war,  variously  estimated, 
had  been,  perhaps,  at  least  $200,000,000,000,  and  perhaps 
$300,000,000,000,  of  which  nearly  two  thirds  had  been 
incurred  by  the  Allies.  Such  vast  expenditures  in  four 
years'  time  could  in  no  wise  be  met  out  of  income,  and  the 
funds  had  been  raised  only  in  small  part  through  taxation. 
Great  Britain  and  afterward  the  United  States  had  pro- 
cured through  taxes  the  largest  sums  ever  so  obtained  in 
the  history  of  the  world;  but  France,  and  Italy,  Austria- 
Hungary,  and  especially  the  German  Empire  had  issued 
repeated  loans,  hoping  to  make  the  defeated  enemy  pay 
sufficient  indemnity  to  cover  them  later  on.  Had  the  con- 
flict been  short,  it  is  possible  that  the  victor  might  have 


Crushing 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       525 


been  able  to  do  this;  but  wlicii  the  long  struggle  was  over 
it  was  evident  that  the  ruined  Central  Powers  had  not 
remaining  sufficient  substance  to  make  good  the  damage 
they  had  wrought  and  then  reimburse  to  the  victors  the 
expenditure  entailed  by  the  war.  Hence  the  j)resent 
generation  found  itself  burdened  with  a  terrible,  crushing 
mortgage  which  might  be  repudiated,  which  might  be 
paid  off  after  many  years  of  economy  and  toil,  which 
might  remain  as  a  veritable  millstone  about  the  necks  of 
weaker  peoples  indefinitely  on  in  the  future.  In  1014  the 
national  debt  of  France  was  about  $0,000,000,000;  after 
the  war  it  was  about  $33,000,000,000,  or  more  than  half 
of  her  national  wealth.  The  debt  of  Great  Britain 
had  risen  from  more  than  $3,000,000,000  to  about 
$40,000,000,000.  The  financial  position  of  Germany  and 
of  Austria  was  so  utterly  desperate  that  their  future 
salvation  could  be  hoped  for  rather  than  understood  and 
explained.  Hard  work,  meager  living,  crushing  taxes 
alone  could  get  rid  of  these  debts.  The  destruction 
caused  by  the  war  had  brought  more  economic  confu- 
sion and  more  widespread  distress  than  the  world  had 
ever  known  before.  Everywhere  prices  were  high  and 
supplies  and  materials  scarce.  Accordingly,  the  despair 
and  unrest,  which  unhappily  had  ahvays  prevailed  among 
those  least  fortunate  and  stable,  were  immensely  increased. 
There  were  many  demands  for  complete  and  innnediate 
reform.  Everywhere  appeared  those  who  proposed  revo- 
lutionary schemes.  Hence  radicals  looked  forward  to 
speedy  dissolution  of  the  existing  social  and  economic 
organization;  many  others  feared  that  dangerous  changes 
were  at  hand;  and  the  conservatives  became  more  con- 
servative until  a  great  tide  of  reaction  set  in. 

More  terrible  than  the  waste  and  the  heritage  of  debt 
was  the  loss  of  life  and  happiness  and  health  that  the 
war  had  entailed.  The  number  of  men  killed  was  esti- 
mated at  9,000,000,  and  the  total  casualties  of  the  struggle 


Financial 
confusion 
and  ruin 


Grave 

problems 

resultant 


Heritage 
of  woe 


526 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Loss  of  life 


The  old  sys- 
tem and  the 
hope  for 
things  better 


The  tragedy 
of  the 
present 


at  33,000,000.  Horrible  were  the  losses  of  Germany 
and  Russia,  and  the  very  flower  of  the  young  manhood  of 
France  was  gone.  For  a  generation  it  would  be  a  ques- 
tion whether  France  or  Servia  or  Poland  could  ever  re- 
cover, and  during  all  this  time  from  the  highlands  of 
Scotland  to  the  great  plain  of  Russia  travellers  would  see 
mutilated  or  weakened  men  dragging  out  the  course  of 
their  lives.  MilHons  of  children  were  orphans,  millions  of 
women  widows.  To  other  millions  of  women  in  England 
and  Germany  and  France  it  would  seem  that  a  curse  was 
upon  the  earth  in  the  time  that  they  lived,  for  many  could 
never  expect  to  marry  or  hope  to  become  mothers  of 
children. 

The  direct  cause  of  this  War  of  Desolation  had  been 
the  actions  of  military  leaders  who  guided  Russia,  Austria- 
Hungary,  and  the  German  Empire.  Much  condemnation 
and  wrath  had  fallen  upon  the  German  people;  and,  as 
matters  were,  this  was  well.  But  in  larger  sense,  the  war 
came  from  the  system  of  things  that  existed  in  Europe. 
And  as  the  passions  of  war  time  subsided  it  was  evident 
that  in  Germany  and  in  Austria-Hungary,  as  in  Russia 
and  France  and  Great  Britain,  a  host  of  plain  and  simple 
men  had  been  torn  from  their  homes  to  be  devoured  in 
the  death-jaws  of  battle.  From  all  these  countries,  and 
especially  from  Great  Britain,  Germany,  and  France,  a 
goodly  company  of  gentlemen,  who  held  in  their  lives  and 
their  keeping  the  best  of  the  present  of  Europe  and  the 
best  of  her  hopes  for  the  future,  had  gone  forth  and  given 
themselves.  Now  they  lay  in  the  silence  of  unnum- 
bered graves.  War  had  taken  the  best.  To  an  ancient 
master  of  tragic  tale  it  might  have  seemed  that  the  air 
was  alive  with  innumerable  spirits  of  slaughtered  men, 
hovering  over  the  trenches  and  fortress  towns,  writhing 
ghostly  hands  in  an  agony  of  woe  and  uttering  mute  im- 
precations upon  the  evil  thing  that  had  touched  them. 
This  system  had  developed  not  from  the  wickedness  of 


THE    SETTLEMENT    OF    1920       527 

particular  men,  but  during  a  lon^  tiiiit*,  from  immcnius  and     The  task  of 
complex  causes.     It  was  to  be  tlie  principal  task  now  of  all      ^^^  future 
the  best  people  to  displace  it  gradually  with  something 
that  was  better. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

The  cost  of  the  war:  E.  1^.  Bogarl,  Direct  and  Indirect  Costs 
of  the  Great  War  (1910);  A.  Deinan^'con,  Le  Di-diti  de  ri'hirope 
(1920);  Oswald  Spongier,  Der  Untcnjany  des  Abendlandes  (1917). 

The  effects  in  Germany  and  Austria-Hungary:  Graf  Julius 
Andrassy,  Diplomatie  und  Welthricy  (1920);  Ferdinand  Runkel, 
Die  Deutsche  Revoluiiun  (1919). 

National  asj)irations:  Rene  Johannet,  Le  Principe  des  Na- 
tionalites  (1919),  critical  of;  R.  W.  Seton-Watson,  Europe  in  the 
Melting-Pot  (1919);  Ralph  Butler,  The  New  Eastern  Europe 
(1919),  concerning  Finland,  Poland,  Lithuania,  and  the  Ukraine. 

Improvements  desired  in  the  new  era  hoj)e(l  for:  Towards  a 
Lasting  Settlement  (1916),  essays  by  several  liberal  and  radical 
authors,  edited  by  C.  R.  Buxton;  W.  H.  Dawson,  Problems  of 
the  Peace  (1918);  Rev.  Walter  MacDonald,  Some  Ethical  Ques- 
tions of  Peace  and  War,  unth  Special  Reference  to  Ireland  (1919); 
Arthur  Ponsonby,  Democracy  and  Diplomacy:  a  Plea  for  Popular 
Control  of  Foreign  Policy  (1915);  Richard  Roberts,  The  Un- 
finished Programme  of  Democracy  (1919). 

The  Congress  of  Paris :  Dr.  E.  J.  Dillon,  The  Peace  Conference 
(1919),  critical  of  and  not  very  satisfactory;  C.  H.  Haskins  and 
R.  H.  Lord,  Some  Problems  of  the  Peace  Conference  (1920); 
Robert  Lansing,  The  Peace  Negotiations:  A  Personal  Narrative 
(1921) ;  A  History  of  the  Peace  Conference  of  Paris,  ed.  by  H.  W. 
V.  Temperley,  2  vols.  (1920);  Andre  Tardieu,  The  Tnith  About 
the  Treaty  (1921);  C.  T.  Thompson,  The  Peace  Conference  Day 
by  Day  (1920),  What  Really  Happened  in  Paris:  the  Story  of  the 
Peace  Conference,  1919,  ed.  by  E.  M.  House  and  Charles 
Seymour  (1921). 

A  league  of  nations:  Viscount  Bryce,  Essays  and  Addresses 
in  War  Time  (1918);  Sir  Geoffrey  Butler,  A  Handbook  to  the 
League  of  Naticms  (1919);  G.  L.  Dickinson,  The  European 
Anarchy  (191G);  Viscount  Grey  and  others.  The  League  of  Na- 
tions (1919);  The  Nations  and  the  League  (1919),  by  ten  repre- 
sentative writers  of  seven  nations;  Lord  Eustace  Percy,  The 
Responsibilities  of  the  League    (1919);   Sir   Frederick   Pollock, 


528  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

The  League  of  Nations  (1919),  with  an  excellent  historical  in- 
troduction; Charles  Sarolea,  Europe  and  the  League  of  Nations 
(1919);  J.  C.  Smuts,  The  League  of  Nations  (1919);  Elizabeth 
York,  Leagues  of  Natioiis,  Ancient,  Medieval,  and  Modern  (1919). 
The  Treaty  of  Versailles:  Bernard  M.  Baruch,  The  Making  of 
the  Reparation  and  Economic  Sections  of  the  Treaty  (1920);  J.  L. 
Garvin,  The  Economic  Foundations  of  Peace  (1919);  Gabriel 
Hanotaux,  Le  Traite  de  Versailles  de  28  Juin,  1919  (1919);  J. 
M.  Kej^nes,  The  Economic  Consequences  of  the  Peace  (1919), 
a  brilliant  but  specious  attack  on  the  economic  conditions  of  the 
Treaty  by  an  important  British  representative  at  Paris. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

SOCIALISM,   SYNDICALISM,  AND   THE 
RUSSIAN   REVOLUTION 

.  .  .  in  the  most  atlvanccd  countries  the  following  will  be  pretty 
generally  applicable:  1.  Abolition  of  property  in  land  and  ap- 
plication of  all  rents  of  land  to  public  purposes.  ...  3.  Aboli- 
tion of  all  right  of  inheritance.  ...  6.  Centralisation  of  the 
means  of  communication  and  transport  in  the  hands  of  the  Stale 
.     .     .     8.     Equal  liability  of  all  to  labour.     .     .     . 

Karl  Marx  and   Friedpuch  Engels,   Manifesto  of  the  Com- 
munist Party  (1848). 

Jesuis  un  partisan  convaincu  de  rc^aZi7ccconomi^?/crf5oaa/c    . 

je  pense  que  I'egalite  doit  s'etablir  dans  le  monde  par  I'organisation 
spontanee  du  travail  et  de  la  propriete  collective  des  associations 
productrices  librement  organisces  et  federalisees  dans  les  com- 
munes, et  par  la  federation  tout  aussi  .spontanee  des  communes, 
mais  non  par  Taction  supreme  et  tutelaire  de  TEtat. 

Mikhail  Bakl'NIN,    Preambule  pour  la  Seconde   Livraison  de 
L'Empire  Knouto-Germanique  (1871). 

We  are  about  to  ask  how  it  is  possible  to  conceive  the  transformation 
of  the  men  of  to-day  into  the  free  producers  of  to-morrow  working 
in  manufactories  where  there  are  no  masters.     .     .     violence  en- 
lightened by  the  idea  of  the  general  strike     .... 
Georges  Sorel,  Reflections  on  Violence  (trans.  1914.) 

Russia  is  declared  to  be  a  Republic  of  Soviets  of  Workmen's,  Soldiers' 
and  Peasants'  Deputies.  All  the  power  in  the  centre  and  in  the 
provinces  belongs  to  these  Soviets. 

.  .  .  private  ownership  of  land  is  abolished,  and  the  whole  land 
fund  is  declared  common  national  property  and  transferred  to  the 
laborers  without  compensation.  Inheritance,  whether  by  law  or  by 
will,  is  abolished. 

Decrees  of  the  Soviet  Government  of  Rus^a,  1917. 

After  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  the  prog-     Progress 
ress  of  socialism  in  Europe  was  increasingly  rapid.     It     of  socialism 
was  spread  abroad  by  the  powerful  writings  of  Karl  Marx,     '"    "^°^® 

529 


530 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Other  social 
doctrines : 
anarchism 


Mikhail 
Bakunin 


by  the  teachings  of  his  associate  Engels,  and  by  the  labors 
of  disciples,  notable  among  whom  was  the  brilliant  Ferdi- 
nand Lassalle  in  Germany.  In  1871  it  received  a  setback 
in  the  overthrow  of  the  Commune  of  Paris,  which  Marx  had 
hoped  would  succeed.  Moreover,  the  socialists,  in  the 
presence  of  their  own  vast  doctrines,  began  to  split  up  into 
different  creeds,  and  by  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth 
century  it  was  often  difficult  for  outsiders  and  even  for 
adherents  to  determine  just  what  socialism  meant.  None 
the  less,  meanwhile  it  continued  to  go  forward,  especially 
in  Germany  and  in  France. 

In  the  course  of  this  time  other  social  doctrines  had  been 
preached,  of  which  the  more  important  made  much  prog- 
ress. Some  of  them  developed  alongside  of  socialism  or 
even  in  opposition  to  it;  others  were  the  outgrowth  or 
extension  of  socialism  itself.  About  the  time  when 
Marx  began  doing  his  work  a  Frenchman,  Pierre-Joseph 
Proudhon,  revived  and  extended  the  teachings  of  prede- 
cessors in  France,  that  government  interfered  with  the 
liberties  and  thwarted  the  happiness  of  most  of  the 
people,  and  that  property  was  got  by  plundering  the  mass 
of  the  people.  His  most  famous  work,  Quest-ce  que  la 
Propriete?  (WTiat  is  Property?),  pubhshed  in  1840,  de- 
clared that  property  was  theft.  He  believed  that  man's 
happiness  could  best  be  obtained  under  anarchism, 
absence  of  government  and  governmental  interference. 
Like  many  others  who  have  taught  extreme  and  subver- 
sive doctrines,  Proudhon  was  a  theorist,  kindly  and  hu- 
mane; but  his  doctrines  were  taken  up  by  bolder  and  more 
violent  persons,  who  undertook  to  accomplish  great  re- 
forms by  getting  rid  of  existing  governments,  and  who 
strove  to  destroy  governments  by  murdering  their  princi- 
pal officials.  Under  Mikhail  Bakunin,  a  Russian,  and  his 
followers,  anarchism  spread  horror  and  dread  throughout 
Europe.  In  the  course  of  a  single  generation  a  tsar  of 
Russia,  an  empress  of  Austria,  a  king  of  Italy,  a  president 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      531 


of  France,  a  premier  of  Spain,  and  even  a  president  of  the 
United  States,  fell  victims  to  anarchist  assassins. 

Marx  was  ahiiost  from  the  first  Ijitterly  opposed  to  the 
teachings  of  Proudlion;  and  sociahsm  and  anarchism  have 
continued  to  he  widely  separate,  emhodying  vvvy  diircrent 
theories  of  organization.  The  anarchists  would  destroy 
all  authority  above,  so  as  to  establish  complete  and  ex- 
treme individual  freedom.  The  ideal  of  the  socialists  was 
that  the  State,  reorganized,  should  control  all  collectively 
or  for  the  common  welfare  of  all  the  i)eople.  Uj)on  the 
great  body  of  men  anarchism  never  had  more  effect  than 
to  excite  wondering  curiosity  or  terror;  and  it  never  did 
much  to  affect  socialist  theories  or  methods. 

But  socialism  was  affected  by  a  radical  movement 
from  within.  In  the  course  of  the  half  century  that  passed 
after  the  time  when  Louis  Blanc  and  Karl  Marx  began 
teaching,  socialism  gained  in  greatness  and  importance, 
and  many  of  the  more  moderate  reforms  advocated  by  its 
adherents  were  slowly  obtained.  Great  and  obvious  evils 
remained,  however,  some  of  wliich  were  not  remedied  be- 
cause it  was  not  known  how  to  amend  them.  During  this 
period  many  of  the  more  moderate  and  practical  socialists 
abandoned  their  extremer  theories  and  took  part  in  the 
politics  of  the  states  where  they  lived,  hoping  thus  to 
better  conditions  by  sustained  and  constructive  effort. 
But  it  was  obvious  that  after  two  generations  many  of  the 
tilings  foretold  by  socialist  leaders  had  not  come  to  pass, 
and  slight  prospect  was  seen  of  bringing  them  about  as 
things  for  the  most  part  were  then  going.  Accordingly,  as 
is  ever  the  case,  the  bolder,  the  rasher,  the  more  fiery  and 
impatient,  proclaimed  that  existing  methods  never  could 
effect  fundamental  betterment,  and  that  the  important 
changes  which  socialists  desired  must  be  obtained  by  very 
different  devices. 

In  France,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  nineteenth  century, 
appeared  leaders  who  proclaimed  that  the  great  goal  of 


Anarchism 
and  social- 
ism 


Discontent 

with  the 
progress 
of  socialism 


Syndicalism 


532 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


"Direct 
action"  by 
trade  unions 


Objects  of 
syndicalism 


Unceasing 

industrial 

warfare 


socialism  was  to  be  reached  not  through  slow,  patient  work 
and  persuasion  but  through  violence  and  force;  not 
through  efforts  in  legislatures,  which  were  the  creations 
of  the  middle  classes,  who  always  controlled  them,  but 
through  direct  action  of  the  workers  themselves.  As 
parliaments  had  been  devised  by  the  middle  class,  so  had 
tlie  working  people  created  an  institution  peculiarly  their 
owTi,  the  trade  union,  which  they  really  controlled,  and 
which  was  their  particular  means  of  bringing  desired 
changes  to  pass.  The  new  movement  was  soon  known  as 
syndicalism,  from  syndicat  (trade  union).  It  spread  rap- 
idly into  other  countries,  and  across  the  ocean  into  Canada 
and  the  United  States,  where  its  adherents  styled  them- 
selves Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  (I.  W.  W.). 

Syndicalists  proposed  to  render  the  workingmen's 
unions  more  powerful  by  making  them  larger  and  more 
comprehensive.  They  would  organize  into  one  big  union 
all  the  workers  employed  in  a  single  industry,  and  then 
make  powerful  alliance  of  the  large  groups.  In  time  of 
need  workers  who  resisted  their  employers  could  be  sup- 
ported by  their  brethren  in  gigantic  strikes,  or  even  general 
strikes,  which  would  paralyze  the  transportation  and 
industrial  life  of  the  nation.  It  was  in  France  that  these 
ideas  were  most  strikingly  carried  out,  though  they  were 
tried  also  in  Russia  and  England.  In  the  years  1906-9 
several  efforts,  only  partly  successful,  were  made  by 
French  workers  to  paralyze  opposition  by  means  of  great 
strikes,  and  in  1910  an  effort  was  made  to  stop  all  railway 
traffic.  But  the  railway  strike  failed  when  the  govern- 
ment mobilized  the  strikers  for  military  service  on  the 
railways,  thus  putting  them  in  effect  under  martial  law; 
and  on  other  occasions  not  all  the  workingmen  joined,  and 
many  citizen  volunteers  took  the  place  of  the  strikers. 
Syndicalist  workmen  were  taught  that  there  must  be  no 
real  peace  even  in  the  time  when  no  strikes  were  going  on, 
but  that  capitalism  must  be  damaged  and  diminished  by 


IX  lil'iO 


and  syndi- 
calism 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      533 

secret,  continual  destruction;  tluit  laborers  must  do  less 
work  than  they  were  paid  for,  and  that  they  must  injure 
the  product  and  hurt  the  machinery  whenever  they  could. 
Since  on  one  occasion,  it  is  said,  certain  French  workmen 
beginning  a  strike  had  thrown  their  wooden  shoes  into  the 
machinery  to  ruin  it,  this  destruction  was  known  as 
sabotage. 

The  extreme  views  and  often  the  violence  of  the  syndical-  Socialism 
ists  not  only  awakened  great  apprehension  wherever  they 
made  themselves  known,  but  aroused  suspicion  among 
some  of  the  socialists  themselves.  Syndicalism  really 
proposed  to  bring  about  some  of  the  most  important  re- 
forms which  socialists  had  originally  taught;  but  syndi- 
calist methods  and  the  results  they  strove  for  were  very 
different  from  what  many  of  the  socialists  now  sup- 
ported. In  the  early  years  of  the  twentieth  century  the 
syndicalist  leaders  in  Liverpool,  in  Dublin,  in  Paris,  in 
Barcelona,  and  elsewhere,  hoped  to  bring  about  the  sup- 
pression of  capitalism  and  the  taking  over  by  workmen  of 
property  and  the  means  of  production,  so  that  the  railways, 
factories,  and  mines  should  be  owned  and  managed  by  the 
laborers  for  their  own  profit  and  advantage.  Some  of  them 
hoped  for  a  new  organization  of  the  State,  which  should 
be  but  a  group  of  industries  or  unions  of  workers,  controlled 
completely  by  the  laborers  within  them.  All  this,  if 
necessary,  should  be  done  by  revolution  and  force. 

In   Germany  socialism  had  been   carried   forward   by     Socialism  in 
Ferdinand  Lassalle,  disciple  of  Marx  and  son  of  a  wealthy     the  German 
Jewish  merchant.     Lacking  the  profound  mind  and  intel-       ™Pire 
lectual  reach  of  his  master,  he  nevertheless  possessed  such 
brilliancy  and  charm  that  he  made  friends  of  officials  like 
Bismarck  and  attracted  a  large  following  among  the  work- 
men of  his  country.     In   18G3  he  founde<l  the  General 
Workingmen's  Association.     Before  nmch  came  of  it  he 
was  killed  in  a  duel,  but  in  1869  the  Social  Democratic 
Party  was  founded  by  VVilhelm  Liebknecht  and  August 


534 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


In  Austria- 
Hungary 


In  France 


Bebel.  Socialists  were  regarded  with  suspicion  and  dis- 
like by  the  government  of  the  new  German  Empire,  stern 
laws  were  passed  against  them,  and  presently  some  of  the 
things  they  demanded  were  done  by  the  State  itself  with 
the  hope  of  lessening  their  influence  and  weakening  their 
power.  Nevertheless,  their  numbers  grew  rapidly  until  at 
last  they  had  the  largest  following  of  any  party  in  the 
country,  though  many  who  were  not  socialists,  but  merely 
liberals  and  moderates,  voted  with  them.  Shortly  after 
the  Social  Democratic  Party  was  founded  it  received  more 
than  100,000  votes;  in  1912  it  had  more  than  4,000,000. 
The  party  was  ably  led  by  Bebel,  who  displayed  great  skill 
in  the  Reichstag,  and  became  one  of  the  striking  orators  of 
his  age.  For  a  long  time  it  could  do  no  more  than  be  a 
party  of  opposition  and  protest;  but  after  the  fall  of  the 
German  Empire  at  the  end  of  the  Great  War  a  German 
republic  was  established,  partly  upon  a  socialist  plan. 
In  Austria-Hungary  also  socialism  made  some  progress; 
but  not  till  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century  did  a 
socialist  political  party  attain  any  importance  there.  This 
was  partly  because  Austria  and  Hungary,  with  respect  to 
industrial  development,  lagged  behind  their  neighbors  to 
the  north  and  the  west,  and  partly  because  in  no  other 
great  state  was  the  population  less  homogeneous,  more 
divided  by  race  and  religion. 

In  France  also  socialism  had  made  rapid  growth,  though 
with  more  violent  upheavals,  which  were  followed  by 
reaction  and  repression,  so  that  development  was  re- 
tarded for  a  while.  A  socialist  movement  in  1848  had  led 
to  a  fierce  uprising  in  Paris,  which  was  quelled  after 
terrible  fighting.  The  capture  of  Paris  by  the  Germans  in 
1871  was  almost  immediately  followed  by  the  establish- 
ment there  of  a  commune,  which,  had  it  been  maintained, 
would  have  been  a  socialist  community  only  loosely  con- 
nected with  the  rest  of  France.  But  against  it  the  con- 
servative people  and  the  peasants  of  the  rural  districts  rose, 


THE    RUSSIAN     REVOLUTION      535 


and  Paris  was  again  capturrd  after  a  siege  more  terril)le 
than  that  endured  at  the  liands  of  the  Germans.  'I'here 
was  much  destruction  of  property  and  life,  followed  by 
great  and  merciless  vengeance.  For  a  time  the  socialists 
were  completely  crushed,  and  socialism  was  entirely  dis- 
credited in  the  eyes  of  most  of  the  people  of  France.  But 
after  a  while  communists  who  had  been  sent  into  exile  were 
allowed  to  return,  and  gradually  socialism  gained  strength 
again.  For  some  time  French  socialists  were  divided  into 
parties,  especially  under  Jules  Guesde,  who  in  Germany 
had  studied  the  Social  Democratic  organization,  and  who 
was  a  follower  of  Marx,  and  under  Jean  Jaures,  the  great- 
est and  most  accomplished  orator  of  his  time,  who  ad- 
vocated gradually  socializing  the  means  of  production. 
In  19D4  the  different  factions  were  united,  and  ten  years 
later  the  French  Socialist  Party  received  1,500,000  votes. 
In  France  socialism  was  supplemented  and  extended  by 
the  syndicalist  doctrines,  which  spread  outward  to  neigh- 
boring countries,  especially  to  Spain,  to  Italy,  to  Great 
Britain,  and  to  Ireland.  In  Belgium,  Italy,  and  in  Spain 
socialist  and  syndicalist  doctrines  had  considerable  effect 
and  got  much  attention. 

In  Great  Britain,  where  the  Industrial  Revolution  had 
begun  and  attained  greatest  growth,  where  Robert  Owen 
and  his  associates  had  taught  some  of  the  first  of  the 
socialist  doctrines,  and  where  Marx  had  spent  the  best  of 
the  years  of  his  life,  socialism  developed  more  slowly  than 
in  Germany  or  France.  This  was  due  very  largely  to  the 
temperament  of  the  British  people,  long  accustomed  to 
slow  change  and  improvement,  and  always  distrustful  of 
the  usefulness  of  theories  and  general  ideas.  For  more 
than  a  generation  in  the  British  Isles  socialism  made 
scarcely  any  progress.  In  1880  "William  ■Morris,  the  poet, 
and  H.  M.  Hyndman,  followers  of  the  teachings  of  Marx, 
organized  the  Social  Democratic  Federation,  which  drew 
no  large  following,  however.     Three  years  later  the  Fabian 


Overthrow 
of  the  Com- 
mune,   1872 


In  Great 
Britain 


536 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Fabian 
Society 


Growth  of 
British 
socialism 
after  1918 


Society  was  founded  by  a  group  of  intellectual  leaders, 
including  the  well-known  writers  on  economic  history, 
Sidney  and  Beatrice  Webb,  the  Anglo-Irish  dramatist, 
G.  B.  Shaw,  and  the  prolific  minor  novelist,  H.  G.  Wells. 
They  proposed  to  follow  the  "Fabian"  policy  of  gradually 
getting  political  parties  to  accept  and  carry  through  social 
reforms.  Presently  socialism  began  to  affect  the  labor 
organizations,  and  in  1893  a  trade-union  leader  organized 
the  Independent  Labor  Party,  whose  members  hoped  that 
socialism  might  be  brought  to  prevail  in  their  country. 
By  1914  British  socialists,  increasingly  numerous  and 
active,  were  advocating  as  a  matter  of  course  the  abolition 
of  capitalism  and  wages,  the  taking  over  by  the  State  of  the 
great  industries,  like  mining  and  transportation,  and  the 
control  of  the  lesser  ones  by  the  workers  themselves. 
During  the  time  of  the  Great  War,  confronted  with  the 
immense  danger  that  threatened  the  destruction  of 
Great  Britain  and  the  British  Empire,  these  doctrines, 
though  much  talked  of  and  written  about,  were  by  most 
of  the  workingmen  of  Britain  thrust  away  into  the  back- 
ground. But  after  the  victory,  when  the  enemy  was 
powerless,  in  the  midst  of  the  want  and  discontent  which 
followed  the  destructive  conflict,  socialism  and  syndicalism 
seemed  to  take  possession  of  a  greater  part  of  the  popu- 
lation than  ever  before.  Accordingly,  some  observers  de- 
clared that  the  Labor  Party  would  in  the  future  get  con- 
trol of  the  government  and  attempt  to  reform  the  State  by 
the  application  of  socialistic  ideas.  And  there  were  not 
wanting  those  who  aflBrmed  that  what  was  called  bolshe- 
vism  had  much  more  chance  of  being  established  in  Great 
Britain,  where  the  majority  of  the  inhabitants  were  an 
industrial  proletariat,  than  in  a  country  like  Russia,  where 
almost  all  the  people  were  peasants,  uneducated  and 
not  progressive.  It  was  very  probable,  however,  that 
here  as  elsewhere,  what  seemed  like  powerful  tendency 
toward  sweeping  social  changes  was  to  a  considerable 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      537 


extent  merely  the  unrest  and  tJie  ferment  following  in- 
evitably in  the  wake  of  the  war. 

In  Russia,  likewise,  socialist  doctrines  had  been  taught, 
but  for  a  long  time  they  had  seemed  to  be  of  slight  impor- 
tance there,  since  in  Russia  there  was  little  industrialism. 
Even  after  the  Russian  industrial  revolution  had  done  its 
work,  the  overwhelming  bod}-  of  the  j)eopIe  continued  to 
be  agricultural  workers,  isolated,  uneducated,  conserNa- 
tive,  and  moved  only  by  desire  to  obtain  a  larger  share  of 
the  agricultural  lands.  Nevertheless,  it  was  in  Russia 
that  the  most  complete  and  thorough-going  experiment  in 
socialism  was  tried.  During  the  misery  and  confusion 
which  overw^helmed  that  country  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
Great  War,  the  old  system  completely  collapsed.  In  1917, 
after  a  revolution  had  overthrown  the  old  government, 
certain  socialists,  whose  leaders  were  Lenine  and  Trotzky, 
forming  a  group  called  the  BoJsheviki,  seized  power  and 
maintained  themselves.  They  then  decreed  some  of  the 
sweeping  changes  W'hich  Marx  had  long  before  hoped 
would  come  to  pass.  Private  property  and  inheritance 
were  abolished;  land,  capital,  transportation  were  national- 
ized; and  it  was  decreed  that  all  people  should  work.  By 
this  time  all  over  the  world  radical  leaders  w^ere  loudly  pro- 
claiming that  socialism  w^as  the  hope  of  the  future,  and 
that  bolshevism  was  destined  shortly  to  overthrow  what 
they  called  the  outworn  systems.  For  the  moment  it 
appeared  to  many  that  the  Russian  Revolution  was  the 
most  striking  event  since  1793,  and  that  bolshevism  held 
untold  possibilities  for  good  or  for  evil  in  the  future.  But 
it  is  probable  that  this  revolution  in  Russia  was  less  the 
result  of  the  advance  and  the  power  of  socialism  than  of 
the  destruction,  the  uncertainty,  and  the  general  unrest, 
which  proceeded  from  the  \Yar  of  the  Nations. 

Perhaps  no  great  struggle  ever  produced  such  mighty 
results  in  so  short  a  time  as  the  war  which  began  in  1914. 
The  conflict  lasted  little  more  than  four  vears,  but  in  that 


In  Russia 


Application 
of  the  doc- 
trines of 
Marx  in 
Russia 


Unrest  of 
the  period 
of  the  war 


538 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Destruction 
resulting 
from  the 
Great  War 


Russia  and 
the  Great 
War 


Reaction- 
aries plan 
to  withdraw 
from  the  war 


time  the  most  powerful  state  in  Europe,  the  German 
Empire,  was  overthrown,  Austria-Hungary  was  broken  to 
pieces  beyond  all  hope  of  redemption,  and  the  Russian 
Empire  not  only  broke  into  pieces,  but  was  the  scene  of  a 
revolution  more  striking  than  any  since  that  which  long 
before  had  transformed  France  and  Europe.  The  conse- 
quences and  changes  of  the  cataclysm  are  not  to  be  esti- 
mated yet.  But  nowhere  else  in  Europe  was  the  old  order 
so  completely  altered  as  in  Russia. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Great  War  the  Russian  armies 
had  much  success,  utterly  defeating  the  Austrians;  but 
their  own  losses  were  heavy,  especially  against  the  Ger- 
mans; and  after  a  while,  as  their  military  material  was 
exhausted,  they  were  forced  to  carry  on  the  struggle  with 
prodigal  and  hideous  sacrifice  of  their  men.  In  1915  the 
Teutonic  allies  defeated  them  completely,  drove  them  from 
the  territory  which  they  had  occupied,  and  conquering 
Poland  and  part  of  the  Baltic  Provinces,  drove  deep  into 
Russia  itself.  From  this  disaster  the  Russians  never 
recovered.  It  was  now  seen  that  a  great  agricultural 
state,  not  well  organized,  could  sustain  no  long  conflict 
with  an  industrial  state  well  organized  for  war  and  well 
equipped.  Russian  war  supplies  were  exhausted;  the 
transportation  system  was  breaking  down;  vast  numbers 
of  men  had  been  killed  or  wounded;  the  country  was  filled 
with  miserable  refugees  from  provinces  taken  by  the  foe. 
It  is  true  that  a  great  national  enthusiasm  had  been  aroused 
at  the  beginning  of  the  conflict.  Russians  desired  to 
help  their  kinsmen  in  Servia,  and  there  was  an  outburst 
against  all  things  German,  the  old  name  of  the  capital, 
St.  Petersburg,  being  changed  to  Petrograd,  the  Slavic 
equivalent.  But  many  of  the  oflScials  and  reactionaries 
had  no  desire  to  continue  the  war,  and  plotted  to  make 
peace  with  Germany  as  soon  as  they  could.  They  feared 
that  a  continuance  of  the  disastrous  conflict  would  destroy 
their  old  privileges  and  position,  and  not  a  few  of  them 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      539 


were  of  German  sympathy  or  extraction.  But  the 
Hberals  in  the  Duma  steadily  supported  the  war,  beHeving 
that  only  with  its  triumphant  conclusion  could  they  obtain 
the  changes  which  they  hoped  for;  and  the  local  zemstros 
did  excellent  work  in  relieving  distress  and  providing 
material  of  war.  In  1916  the  Russians  made  a  last  great 
effort,  with  much  success,  but  at  enormous  cost;  and  after 
this  they  could  do  no  more.  By  the  end  of  the  year  the 
nation  was  almost  completely  exhausted;  the  inefficient 
government  had  nearly  broken  down,  and  thought  only  of 
making  peace  in  time  to  save  itself;  and  the  people  had 
suffered  almost  to  the  limit  of  endurance. 

The  end  came  with  a  suddenness  that  surprised  the 
world.  The  poorer  people  in  Petrograd  were  starving,  and 
hunger  now  drove  them  to  revolution,  as  once  it  had  driven 
the  rabble  of  Paris.  Early  in  March,  1917,  bread  riots 
began,  which  increased  until  the  whole  city  was  filled  with 
fighting  and  confusion,  during  which  the  troops  deserted 
the  government  and  went  over  to  the  mobs.  The  op- 
position in  the  Duma  was  plotting  to  overthrow  the 
government  at  this  very  time;  and  the  Duma  was  now  sus- 
pended. The  tsar  acted  with  much  weakness  and  in- 
decision and  the  capital  was  lost.  The  other  great  cities  of 
the  Empire  joined  the  revolution,  and  a  part  of  the  Duma 
now  instituted  a  provisional  government  of  the  country. 
The  abdication  of  the  tsar  was  demanded.  March  15 
Nicholas  II,  "Emperor  of  all  the  Russias,"  laid  down  his 
power,  and  the  dynasty  of  the  Romanovs  came  to  an  end. 

As  after  events  were  to  show  this  was  one  of  the  momen- 
tous events  in  the  history  of  Europe.  For  ages  autocracy 
had  maintained  itself  in  eastern  Europe.  For  a  thousand 
years  at  Constantinople  the  Byzantine  emperors  had  ruled 
absolutely,  heads  of  Church  and  State,  and  from  their 
empire  some  civilization  had  gone  up  through  the  Balkans, 
and  also  into  south  Russia.  Of  this  civilization  the  Rus- 
sians had  been  principal  heirs,  and  their  government  and 


Beginning 
of  the  Rus- 
sian Revo- 
lution, 
1917 


Fall  of  the 
tsardom 


540 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


First  stage: 
attempted 
moderate 
reforms 


ente 

sian  \ 


Extrei 
Russian 

socialists: 
the  Bol- 
aheviki 


their  religion  had  in  the  course  of  centuries  been  spread 
over  half  of  Europe.  Under  the  Russian  tsars  lived  a 
fourth  part  of  all  the  white  people  in  the  world.  While 
most  of  the  other  white  people  in  Europe  and  the  Ameri- 
cas had  developed  self-government  and  gone  forward  in 
material  civilization,  the  Slavs  had  lagged  far  behind. 
Now,  after  supporting  the  old  system  for  a  long  time  or 
else  passively  enduring  its  evils,  they  suddenly  overthrew 
it,  and,  as  was  evidenced  very  soon,  they  overthrew  it 
completely.  Everywhere  was  the  Russian  Revolution  of 
1917  hailed  as  a  great  advancement  for  democracy,  and 
rash  expectations  were  cherished  of  the  benefits  im- 
mediately to  follow. 

The  provisional  government  attempted  to  effect  liberal 
reform,  set  up  a  constitutional  government  after  the 
model  of  the  states  of  western  Europe,  restore  order,  and 
continue  a  vigorous  prosecution  of  the  war.  This  govern- 
ment was  in  the  hands  of  the  Constitutional  Democrats  led 
by  Prince  Lvov,  and  by  Miliukov,  assisted  by  Kerensky,  a 
moderate  socialist  leader.  An  assembly  was  to  be  called 
to  draw  up  a  new  constitution.  Meanwhile,  a  general 
amnesty  was  proclaimed  for  political  offenders,  and 
freedom  of  speech  was  announced,  and  universal  suffrage, 
for  both  men  and  women. 

But  the  liberal  leaders  were  by  no  means  able  to  control 
the  revolution  now  started.  The  socialists  and  radicals 
in  both  city  and  country  joined  forces,  and  soon  proved  to 
be  the  most  powerful  and  aggressive  body  in  the  country. 
They  began  to  be  known  as  the  BolsheviJd.  Twelve  years 
before,  at  the  time  of  the  earlier  revolution,  the  Social 
Democratic  Party  of  the  industrial  workers  had  split  into 
two  parts,  a  moderate  minority,  the  Menskeviki  (Russian 
menshe,  less)  and  the  majority  of  radicals,  led  by  Nicolai 
Lenine,  the  Bolsheviki  (Russian  bolshe,  more).  Now  in 
1917  the  more  radical  peasants  of  the  Social  Revolutionary 
Party  combined  with  the  radical  socialists  of  the  cities. 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      o41 


desiring  a  far  more  complete  revolution  than  they  thought 
had  yet  been  attained,  and  caring  less  for  mere  political 
change  than  thorough  social  alteration.  To  bring  this 
about  they  wished  to  end  the  war  at  once.  Their  leaders 
taught  that  the  Great  War  had  been  brought  about  by 
capitalists  and  imperialists  of  all  the  countries  alike,  all  of 
whom  had  as  their  chief  interest  the  exploitation  of  the 
masses.  Everywhere  the  proletariat  and  the  mass  of  the 
people  must  compel  the  making  of  peace,  after  which  the 
people  must  overthrow  the  upper  class  and  the  selfish 
bourgeoisie  and  capitalists,  then  usher  in  the  great  reforms 
of  the  socialists,  which  would  bring  real  freedom  to  the 
masses  of  the  world. 

Such  were  the  Bohhevild.  Their  teachings  were  not 
new,  but  to  many  of  the  hungry,  disheartened,  suffering 
people  of  Russia,  most  of  whom  had  no  political  experience 
whatever,  these  doctrines  came  as  a  great  new  message  or 
else  made  no  difference  whatever.  All  over  the  world  the 
dislocation  caused  by  the  wjir  had  produced  a  stirring  and 
unrest,  and  a  willingness  of  men  to  hearken  to  strange, 
revolutionary  doctrines.  The  teachings  of  the  Bohhevild 
began  to  spread  over  the  country,  everywhere  undermining 
the  existing  order.  The  Germans  soon  understood  how 
greatly  Russia  would  be  weakened  by  this.  So  they 
helped  some  of  the  Russian  extremists  to  return  to  their 
country,  and  assisted  them  as  much  as  they  could.  The 
Russian  soldiers  holding  the  east  front  against  the  Ger- 
mans were  told  that  they  need  not  obey  their  officers,  and 
all  discipline  was  soon  at  an  end.  They  were  likewise  told 
that  the  land  was  being  divided  up  among  the  people,  and 
they,  deserting  to  get  their  share,  the  Russian  armies 
melted  away.  The  socialists  demanded  a  "democratic" 
peace  with  "no  annexations  and  no  indemnities."  Ger- 
man soldiers  fraternized  with  the  Russians,  declaring  that 
they  also  desired  this,  and  military  operations  in  the  east 
came  nearlv  to  an  end. 


Social  and 
economic 
alteration 
desired 


The  Ger- 
mans and 
the  Bol- 
shevik i 


"No  annexa- 
tions and  no 
indemnities" 


542 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Second 
stage:  the 
Bolsheviki 
get  control 


Lenine 

and 

Trotzky 


The  Bol- 
sheviki 
accept  the 
Peace  of 
Brest- 
Litovsk 


Meanwhile,  a  provisional  government  of  liberals  was 
trying  to  rule  the  country  and  continue  the  war.  In 
many  places,  however,  the  radicals  took  affairs  into  their 
own  hands,  the  people  choosing  Soviets,  or  councils  of  dele- 
gates of  the  soldiers,  sailors,  and  workingmen.  The  most 
powerful  and  important  was  the  soviet  at  Petrograd,  which 
regarded  itself  as  representing,  in  effect,  the  radicals  of  the 
country.  In  every  way  possible  it  opposed  the  Provisional 
Government,  and  was  determined  to  get  control  of  the 
government  itself.  It  was  not  long  before  Miliukov  and 
Prince  Lvov  lost  power  and  Kerensky  became  the  head  of 
affairs;  but  he,  who  had  formerly  seemed  a  radical,  was 
soon  left  far  behind  in  the  violent  progress  of  the  revo- 
lution. He  strove  valiantly  to  restore  the  armies,  but 
the  Germans  completely  routed  the  Russians  and  in 
September  they  captured  Riga.  Lenine,  the  bolshevik 
leader,  was  now  in  the  country,  as  was  Trotzky  who  had 
also  taken  part  in  the  Revolution  of  1905.  Boldly 
and  with  great  energy  and  skill  they  urged  the  work- 
men to  overthrow  the  old  system  completely.  More 
and  more  did  disorder  and  anarchy  increase  as  the  old 
system  went  down  in  ruin,  as  Kerensky  and  other  moder- 
ates lost  hold,  and  as  the  Bolsheviki  took  their  place.  In 
November  the  garrison  of  Petrograd  went  over  to  them 
and  Kerensky  fled  from  the  city.  He  strove  to  recover 
his  power  but  was  defeated,  and  fled  from  the  country. 
Meanwhile,  the  Bolsheviki  gained  Moscow,  Kiev,  and 
other  places,  fighting  fiercely,  and  putting  down  their 
enemies  with  iron  hand. 

The  Russian  Revolution  now  entered  upon  another 
phase.  The  Bolsheviki  abandoned  the  Allies,  and  began 
negotiations  for  a  separate  peace.  The  Germans,  who  had 
no  more  to  gain  by  pretended  friendship,  threw  off  the 
mask,  and  at  Brest-Litovsk,  in  March,  1918,  compelled  the 
Russian  leaders  to  agree  to  a  terrible  peace,  which  undid 
the  work  of  Russian  expansion  and  development  for  the 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      543 


past  two  hundred  years,  and  broke  the  Russian  Empire 
into  fragments.  Finland,  Pohind,  the  Bali  ic  Provinces,  the 
Ukraine,  were  to  be  abandoned  along  with  other  territory, 
and  Russia,  paying  a  large  indemnity,  was  to  be  left  cut 
off  almost  entirely  from  the  sea,  in  economic  subservience 
to  the  German  Empire.  Germany  now  was  completely 
victorious  in  the  east.  Lenine  and  Trotzky  regarded  all 
this  without  great  concern.  They  had  no  desire  for  un- 
willing peoples  to  be  held  subject  by  Russia,  and  they  be- 
lieved that  bolshevism  among  the  German  masses  would 
soon  overthrow  German  autocracy  also.  They  turned 
with  greater  interest  to  domestic  problems,  which  always 
they  had  most  at  heart. 

They  attempted  to  set  up  a  political  organization 
different  from  what  existed  in  other  countries.  Lenine 
wished  Russia  to  be  a  republic  in  which  political  power 
would  be  vested  in  Soviets  or  councils  of  workmen,  soldiers, 
or  peasants.  The  state  was  to  be  socialized,  taking  over 
banks,  railways,  industrial  enterprises,  and  land,  to 
nationalize  them  and  make  them  the  property  of  all  of  the 
people.  A  series  of  decrees  was  issued  to  effect  these 
designs,  and  to  abolish  inheritance  and  private  ownership 
of  property.  Actually,  while  many  changes  were  made, 
some  of  them  in  theory  at  least  having  much  merit,  a  great 
part  of  the  programme  soon  broke  down.  The  peasants  had 
already  seized  most  of  the  land  and  divided  it,  and  were 
little  disposed  to  see  it  taken  away  and  made  the  property 
of  the  nation.  The  new  order  in  Russia  was  regarded  with 
much  suspicion  elsewhere.  The  bolshevists  announced 
their  intention  of  overthrowing  capitalism  and  the  bour- 
geoisie in  all  countries;  hence  the  Allies  were  hostile. 
Disorders  broke  out  and  numerous  counter-revolutionary 
movements,  in  the  course  of  which  there  was  great  cruelty 
and  slaughter,  and  much  destruction  of  property.  Appar- 
ently Russia  sank  lower  and  lower  in  economic  demorali- 
zation and  confusion,  but  Lenine  and  Trotzky,  who  had 


The  Russian 
Empire  in 
fragments 


The  bolshe- 
vist  system 
in  Russia 


Disorder 
and  de- 
struction 


544 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


Counter- 
revolution- 
ary move- 
ments 


War  with 
Poland 


dispensed  now  with  most  of  the  Soviets,  ruthlessly  crushed 
all  resistance.  Great  numbers  of  the  upper  classes  and 
more  intelligent  people  were  slaughtered,  and  some  time 
in  1918  the  tsar  was  murdered  miserably  in  Ekaterinburg 
far  away. 

In  the  autumn  of  1918  Germany  and  Austria,  exhausted 
by  the  length  of  the  struggle,  weakened  by  the  influence 
of  bolshevism  in  the  east,  and  overwhelmed  by  their  foes 
in  the  west,  abandoned  the  contest  and  surrendered.  But 
the  end  of  the  Great  War  brought  no  peace  for  Russia.  By 
most  of  the  people  in  the  rest  of  the  world  the  bolshevists 
were  regarded  with  fear  and  suspicion,  and  Russia  was  not 
permitted  to  have  communication  with  other  countries. 
In  the  next  two  years  several  great  counter-revolutionary 
movements  were  organized.  In  Siberia  Admiral  Kolchak, 
in  south  Russia  General  Denikine,  along  the  Baltic  General 
Yudenitch,  all  prepared  to  march  upon  the  center  of  the 
country  and  overthrow  bolshevist  rule.  At  one  time  they 
all  seemed  near  to  considerable  success,  but  by  the  end  of 
1919  Lenine  and  Trotzky  were  completely  triumphant. 
Somewhat  later  the  Poles,  who  beheved  that  their  new 
state  was  gravely  threatened  by  bolshevist  activities, 
suddenly  invaded  Russia  and  drove  on  until  their  armies 
captured  Kiev.  But  the  Russian  people,  whatever  their 
attitude  toward  bolshevism  and  a  socialist  government 
might  be,  were  filled  with  strong  national  feeling  against 
their  old  enemies  the  Poles.  They  ralhed  to  the  support 
of  Lenine's  government,  drove  the  invader  out  of  Russia, 
pressed  on  across  Polish  territory  and  were  stopped  only 
at  the  gates  of  Warsaw.  There  they  were  held  and 
defeated.  While  the  tide  of  war  was  flowing  and  ebbing 
across  this  wasted  country,  and  while  Poland  and  Russia 
were  both  being  reduced  to  the  last  stages  of  exhaustion, 
the  relics  of  Denikine's  forces,  assisted  by  the  British  and 
the  French,  took  refuge  in  the  Crimea,  and,  under  the 
leadership  of  General  Wrangel,  rapidly  gained  new  strength. 


I 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      545 

During  such  time  as  the  Poles  and  the  bolshevist  armies  AH  opposi- 
were  engaged  in  figliting  each  other,  Wrangel's  forces  ^'°°  ""^  ^ 
moved  north  from  their  strongliold  and  for  a  moment 
seemed  to  have  some  chance  of  success.  But  no  sooner 
had  the  Poles  and  the  Russians  made  peace  than  the  .soviet 
forces  were  marched  to  the  south,  the  narrow  neck  of  the 
Crimean  Peninsula  was  forced,  and  before  the  end  of  1920 
the  counter-revolutionary  movement  had  been  everywhere 
utterly  crushed. 

Much  obscurity  continued  to  surround  these  events. 
It  would  seem  that  the  efforts  of  Kolchak  and  Denikine, 
which  were  supported  by  the  Allied  governments,  were 
in  Russia  regarded  to  some  extent  as  outside  aggression; 
and  that  the  Russian  people,  with  national  spirit  aroused, 
rallied  to  support  the  government  in  power,  even  though 
many  of  them  had  as  little  love  for  Lenine  and  his  system 
in  1919  as  some  Frenchmen  in  1793  had  for  Robespierre 
and  a  French  republic.  It  is  probable,  moreover, 
that  some  of  the  strongest  supporters  of  the  counter- 
revolutionary leaders  were  members  of  the  upper  classes 
and  dispossessed  landowners,  who  hoped  that  the  over- 
throw of  bolshevism  would  make  possible  a  return  of  the 
privileges  and  possessions  they  had  lost.  Accordingly,  a 
great  number  of  Russian  peasants,  who  had  no  desire  for 
socialism  and  no  understanding  of  it,  rallied  under  the 
Bolsheviki  to  defeat  reaction.  In  19'-20,  therefore,  it 
seemed  that  bolshevism  had  established  itself  firml}',  for 
the  time  being,  in  Russia. 

No  event  for  a  hundred  years  had  aroused  such  strong     Causes  of 

feeliuff    as    this   Russian    Revolution,    and    such    diverse     te  success 

.  .  ,  ,  „.      .  .  of  the  Bol- 

opinions    arose    concernmg    it    and    such    connictmg    m-     sheviki 

formation  that  it  was  almost  impossible  to  find  out  the 

truth.     It  would  seem  that  the  Bohhcrihi  were  only  a 

small    minority,    perhaps    not    more   than    600,000    in    a 

population  of  180,000,000.     They  succeeded  because  they 

acted  with  the  most  vigor  and  determination  in  a  time  of 


y 


546 


EUROPE    SINCE    1870 


The  Russian 
people  de- 
sire agrarian 
reform 


Prospect  of 
the  future 


distress  and  confusion.  They  were  supported  partly  by 
Russian  national  spirit  and  partly  by  those  who  dreaded 
reaction.  Furthermore,  they  maintained  themselves  by 
means  of  a  reign  of  terror,  and  also  because  they  held  the 
chief  cities  and  such  railway  facilities  as  remained.  But 
it  seemed  probable  that  their  extreme  socialistic  pro- 
gramme was  a  failure,  and  that  they  were  doomed  to  fall. 
Most  of  the  Russian  peasants  had  no  knowledge  of  social- 
ism and  no  desire  for  it,  and  in  most  of  the  country  bolshe- 
vism  never  took  root.  Nevertheless,  it  was  certain  that 
the  old  Russia  had  gone,  even  as  the  old  France  was 
gone  by  1795.  Perhaps  later  on,  after  exceeding  misery 
and  exhaustion,  the  Russians,  without  autocracy  and 
with  the  lands  in  possession  of  the  people,  would  go  for- 
ward in  the  construction  of  a  new  and  better  state, 
more  nearly  on  the  model  of  the  great  democracies  else- 
where. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Socialism :  in  addition  to  the  volumes  cited  in  the  bibliography 
at  the  end  of  Chapter  V,  The  Socialism  of  To-Day,  edited  by  W. 
E.  Walling,  J.  G.  P.  Stokes,  and  others  (1916),  contains  docu- 
ments and  statements  of  principles;  The  Socialist  Year  Book 
and  Labour  Annual:  a  Guide  Book  to  the  Socialist  and  Labour 
Movement  at  Home  and  Abroad  (published  by  the  National 
Labour  League,  Manchester,  1913-);  August  Bebel,  Aus 
Meinem  Leben,  3  vols.  (1910-14),  abridged  trans.  My  Life 
(1912);  L.  B.  Boudin,  The  Theoretical  System  of  Karl  Marx  in 
the  Light  of  Recent  Criticism  (1907) ;  Alfred  Fouillee,  Le  Socialisme 
et  la  Sodologie  Reformiste  (1909);  Robert  Hunter,  Socialists  at 
Work  (1908);  Karl  Kautsky,  The  Social  Revolution  (trans.  1907), 
Ethics  and  the  Materialist 'Conception  of  History  (trans.  1907), 
The  Class  Struggle  (trans.  1910);  Edmond  Kelly,  Twentieth 
Century  Socialism  (1910);  Emile  de  Laveleye,  Le  Socialisme 
Contemporaine  (2d  ed.  1883);  J.  Longuet,  Le  Mouvement  Social- 
iste  International  (1913);  Franz  Mehring,  Geschichte  der  Deuts- 
chen  Sozialdemokratie  (1904),  best  on  the  subject,  by  a 
socialist;  T.  G.  Masaryk,  Die  Philosophischen  und  Sociologischen 


THE    RUSSIAN    REVOLUTION      547 

Gnmdlagcn  dcs  Marxi.wius:  Studien  zur  Socialen  Frage  (1899j; 
S.  P.  Orth,  Socialism  and  Democracy  in  Europe  (1913);  J.  Rae, 
Contemporary  Socialism  (ed.  1908),  excellent;  Jjme  T.  Stodclart, 
The  Neic  Socialism,  an  Impartial  Inquiry  (1909). 

By  critics  and  opponents  of  socialism :  II.  C.  Day,  S.  J.,  Catho- 
lic Democracy:  Individualism,  and  Socialism  (1914),  Catholic; 
W.  H.  Mallock,  A  Critical  Examination  of  Socialism  (1907);  A. 
Schaffle,  trans,  by  B.  Bosanquet,  The  Quintessence  of  Socialism 
(1880);  V.  G.  Simkhovitch,  Marxism  versus  Socialism  (1913); 
O.  D.  Skelton,  Socialism:  a  Critical  Analysis  (1911),  excellent. 

Anarchism:  P.  J.  Proudhon,  Qu'est-ce  qne  la  Propriete? 
(1840),  trans,  by  B.  R.  Tucker,  What  Is  Property^,  2  vols. 
(1902);  E.  A.  Vizetelly,  The  Anarchists  (ed.  1916);  E.  V.  Zenker, 
Anarchism  (Eng.  trans.  1898). 

Trade  unions:  L.  T.  Ilobhouse,  The  Labour  Movement  (3d 
ed.  1912);  Sidney  and  Beatrice  Webl),  The  History  of  Trade 
Unionism  (ed.  1920),  Industrial  Democracy  (1902). 

Social  problems:  J.  G.  Brooks,  The  Social  Unrest  (1913);  F. 
A.  Ogg,  Social  Progress  in  Contemporary  Europe  (1912);  Roger 
Fighicra,  La  Protection  Ugale  dcs  Travailleurs  en  France  (1913); 
Gabriel  Ilanotaux,  La  Democratie  et  le  Travail  (1910);  Paul 
Leroy-Beaulieu,  La  Question  Ouvriere  au  XIX'  Siccle  (1888); 
E.  Levasseur,  Questions  Ouvrieres  et  Industrielles  en  France  sous 
la  Troisieme  Repuhlique  (1907) ;  A.  R.  Orage,  ed.,  National  Guilds 
(1914);  S.  and  B.  Webb,  Problems  of  Modern  Industry  (1898). 

Syndicalism:  J.  II.  Harley,  Syndicalism  (1912);  Robert  Hun- 
ter, Violence  and  the  Labor  Movement  (1914);  Louis  Ix^vine,  The 
Labor  Movement  in  France  (1912),  best;  J.  A.  Little,  Industrial 
Warfare;  the  Aims  and  Claims  of  Capital  and  Labour  (1912); 
Paul  Louis,  Ilistoire  du  Mouvement  Syndical  en  France,  1789- 
1910  (2d  ed.  1911),  Le  Syndicalisme  Europeen  (1914);  Bertrand 
Russell,  Roads  to  Freedom:  Socialism^  Anarchism,  and  Syndical- 
ism (1918);  Georges  Sorel,  Reflexions  sur  la  Violence  (1909), 
trans,  by  T.  E.  Ilulme,  Reflections  on  Violence  (1916);  Philip 
Snowden,  Socialism  and  Syndicalism  (1913) ;  J.  Spargo,  Syndical- 
ism, Industrial  Unionism,  and  Socialism  (1913). 

The  Russian  Revolution :  Claude  Anet,  La  Revolution  Russe, 
4  vols.  (1918-19);  Otto  Bauer,  Bolschevismus  odcr  Sozialdc- 
mokratie  (1920);  Catherine  Breshkovsky,  A  Message  to  the 
American  People  (1919);  ttienne  Buisson,  Les  Bolchcviki  (1917- 
1919):  Fait^,  Documents,  Commentaires  (1919);  E.  J.  Dillon, 
The  Eclipse  of  Russia  (1918):  A.  F.  Kerensky,   The  Prelude 


548  EUROPE    SINCE    1870 

to  Bolshevism,  the  Kornilov  Rebellion  (1919);  Colonel  V.  I. 
Lebedeff,  Tlie  Russian  Democracy  in  Its  Struggle  Against  the 
Bolshevist  Tyranny  (1919);  Paul  Miliiikov,  Bolshevism:  an  Inter- 
national Danger  (1920);  Report  of  the  British  Labour  Delegation 
to  Russia,  1920  (1920);  E.  A.  Ross,  Russia  in  Upheaval  (1919); 
Bertrand  Russell,  The  Practice  and  Theory  of  Bolshevisvi  (1920); 
^Irs.  Philip  Snowden,  Through  Bolshevik  Russia  (1920);  John 
Spargo,  Bolshevism:  the  Enemy  of  Political  and  Industrial 
Democracy  (1919);  Leon  Trotzky  [Bronstein],  The  History  of  the 
Russian  Revolution  to  Brest-Litovsk  (1919). 

The  bolshevist  leaders:  M.  A.  Landau-Aldanov,  Lenine 
(1919);  Nicolai  Lenine  [V.  I.  Ulianov],  The  State  and  Revolution 
(1919);  L.  Trotzky,  Our  Revolution:  Essays  on  Working-Class 
and  International  Revolution,  1901^-1917,  collected  and  trans- 
lated by  M.  J.  Olgin  (1918),  for  many  of  the  ideas  about  sup- 
pressing the  bourgeoisie  and  erecting  a  dictatorship  of  the 
proletariat,  and  The  Bolsheviki  and  World  Peace  (1918). 


I 


APPENDIX 


I 


APPENDIX 
EUROPEAN    RULERS    SINCE     1870 

AUSTRIA-HUNG.\RY 

Francis  Joseph,  1848-191G  Charles  I,  1916-18 

BELGIUM 
Leopold  II,  1865-1909  Albert  I,  1909- 

BULGARIA 

Principality  until  1909,  kingdom  afterward. 

Alexander,  1879-80  Boris  I,  1918- 

Ferdinand  I,  1887-1918 

DENMARK 

Christian  IX,  1863-1906  Christian  X,  1912- 

Frederick  VIII,  1906-12 

FRANCE 

Government  of  National  Defence,  1870-1 

Presidents  of  the  French  Republic 

Adolphe  Thiers,  1871-3  Emile  Loubet,  1899-1906 

Marshal  MacMahox,  1873-9  Arm  and  Fall:  eh  es,  1906-13 

Jules  Grevy,  1879-87  Raymond  Poincare,  1913-20 

Sadi  Carnot,  1887-94  Paul  Deschanel,  1920 

Casimir-Perier,  1894-5  Alexandre  Millerand, 
Felix  Faure,  1895-9  1920- 

551 


552  APPENDIX 

THE  GERMAN  EMPIRE 

William  I,  1871-88  William  II,  1888-1918 

Frederick  III,  1888 

Chancellors 

Prince  Bismarck,  1871-90 
Count  von  Caprivi,  1890-4 
Prince  Hohenlohe-Schillingsfiirst,  1894-1900 
Count  von  Bulow,  1900-8 
Theobald  von  Bethmann-Hollweg,  1908-17 
Georg  Michaelis,  1917 
Count  von  Hertling,  1917-18 
Prince  Max  of  Baden,  1918 
The  German  Republic,  1918- 

THE  UNITED  KINGDOM  OF  GREAT  BRITAIN  AND 

IRELAND 

Victoria,  1837-1901  George  V,  1910- 

Edward  VII,  1901-10 

Prime  Ministers 

William  Ewart  Gladstone,  1868-74 

Benjamin  Disraeli  (Earl  of  Beaconsfield,  1876),  1874-80 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (ii),  1880-5 

Robert  Cecil  (Marquis  of  Salisbury),  1885-6 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (in),  1886 

Marquis  of  Salisbury  (ii),  1886-92 

W.  E.  Gladstone  (iv),  1892-4 

Archibald  P.  Primrose  (Earl  of  Rosebery),  1894-5 

Marquis  of  Salisbury  (iii),  1895-1902 

Arthur  James  Balfour,  1902-5 

Sir  Henry  Campbell-Bannerman,  1905-8 

Herbert  Henry  Asquith,  1908-16 

David  Lloyd  George,  1916- 

GREECE 

George  I,  1863-1913  Alexander  I,  1917-1920 

CoNSTANTiNE  I,  1913-17  CoNSTANTiNE  I  (restored)  1921- 


I 


APPENDIX  553 

ITALY 

Victor  Emmanuel  II,  1849-78    Victor  Emmanuel  III,  1900- 
HUMBERT,  1878-1900 

MONTENEGRO 

Principality  until  1910;  kingdom,  until  1018;  then  incorporated 
into  Jugoslavia 

Nicholas  I,  1860-1918 

THE  KINGDOM  OF  THE  NETHERLANDS 
William  III,  1849-90  Wilhelmina,  1890- 

NORWAY 

Ruled  by  the  kings  of  Sweden,  1814-1905 

Haakon  VII,  1905- 

THE  POPES 

Pius  IX,  1846-78  Pius  X,  1903-14 

Leo  XIII,  1878-1903  Benedict  XV,  1914- 

PORTUGAL 

Luiz  I,  1861-89  Mangel  II,  1908-10 

Carlos,  1889-1908  Republic.  1910- 

PRUSSIA 

William  I,  1861-88  William  H,  1888-1918 

Frederick  HI,  1888 

RUMANIA 

Principality  until  1881,  kingdom  afterward. 
Charles  I,  1866-1914  Ferdinand  I,  1914- 

RUSSIA 

Alexander  II,  1855-81  Nicholas  II,  1894-1917 

Alexander  III,  1881-94  Provisional  government,  1917 

Republic  of  Soviets,  1918 
Bolsheviki 


554  APPENDIX 

SERVIA 

Principality  until  1882;  kingdom  afterward;  in  1918  the  ruler 
became  king  of  the  "  Unitary  Kingdom  of  Serbs,  Croats,  and  Slo- 
venes" (Jugo-Slavia). 

MiL.^N,  1868-89  Peter  I,  1903- 

Alexander,  1889-1903 

SPAIN 

Amadeo  of  Savoy,  1870-3  Alphonso  XII,  1875-85 

Spanish  Republic,  1873-5  Alphonso  XIII,  1886- 

SWEDEN 

Charles  XV,  1859-72  Gustavus  V,  1907- 

OscAR  II,  1872-1907 

TURKEY 

Abdul-Aziz,  1861-76  Mohammed  V,  1909-18 

MuRAD  V,  1876  Mohammed  VI,  1918- 

Abdul-Hamid,  1876-1909 


INDEX 


INDEX 


Abdul  Hamid,  193,  324. 

Abgeordnetenhau.i,   311. 

Abyssinia,  34!),  371,  389. 

Accident  Insurance  Laws,  163. 

Act  of  I'nion,  concerning  Scotland 
and  England,  "iHH;  concerning  Ire- 
land and  Great  Britain,  258. 

Adowa,  389. 

Adrianople,  captured  by  the  Turks, 
316;  by  the  Russians,  323;  by  the 
Bulgars,  327,  328;  reoccupied  by 
the  Turks,  331;  ceded  to  Greece, 
336. 

Adriatic  Sea,  13,  180,  305,  315,  350, 
428. 

^gean  Sea,  305;  islands  of,  320. 

AflFairof  1875,  233.  23-i. 

Afghanistan,  378,  405. 

Africa,  in  1920,  522. 

Agadir,  411. 

Age  of  Reason,  29. 

Agrarian  Reform,  in  Ireland,  200;  in 
Rumania.  338.  3;J9. 

Agricultural  Laborers,  in  Great  Bri- 
tain, 252 

Agriculture,  in  the  German  Empire, 
152,  153;  in  Italy,  347;  in  Spain,  352. 

Aisne,  Battle  of  the,  463. 

Alabama  Claims,  101. 

Albania,  13,  319,  323,  325,  328,  334, 
416,  417,  519. 

.\lexander  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  111,  502. 

Alexander  II,  Tsar  of  Russia,  25,  112; 
accession  of,  269,  270;  emancipa- 
tion of  the  serfs  by,  270;  reforms 
under,  273;  becomes  conservative, 
274;  assas.sination  of,  280,  281. 

Alexander  III,  Tsar  of  Russia,  reign 
of,  281-90;  policy  of,  281;  reaction 
under,  282,  283;  policy  of  Russifi- 
cation  under,  283,  284.  287-9. 

Alexander,  Prince  of  Battenberg,  340. 

Alexander  ("ouza,  337,  ,338. 

Alfonso  XII,  King  of  Spain,  350. 

Alfonso  XIII,  King  of  Spain,  350,  351. 

Algeciras,  Conference  of,  403. 

Algeciras  Agreement,  403,  412. 

Algeria,  181.  382,  .38,3,  394. 

Ali,  Pasha  of  Janina,  319. 


Allies,  The,  advantages  of  in  the  Great 
War,  456,  457;  superior  resources  of, 
450;  tenacity  and  moral  courage  of, 
457;  conmiand  of  the  sea  kept  by, 
472^1;  great  offensive  of,  492-4; 
triumph  of,  495. 

Almanack  de  Golha,  301. 

Alsace,  136. 

Alsace-Ix)rraine,  under  German  rule, 
lOU  170;  taking  of,  190;  a  Reichs- 
land,  310;  desire  for  the  recovery  of, 
431;  question  of,  505,  506;  ceded  to 
France,  514. 

Amadeo  of  Siivoy,  350. 

Americans,  arrive  in  France,  491; 
take  the  St.  Mihiel  salient,  493; 
clear  the  Argonne,  493,  494. 

Amiens,  14,  490. 

Anarchism,  279,  280,  5.30,  531. 

Anatolia,  116,  195. 

Ancien  Regime,  7-9,  17-20. 

Anglo-French  Agreement  of  1899, 
384. 

Anglo-CJerman  Agreement  of  1890, 
387. 

Anglo-German  Agreement  of  1914, 
207. 

Anglo-Russian  Accord,  404,  405,  432. 

Anglo-Saxon  Conquest  of  Britain,  256. 

Anglo-Saxon  Tongue,  336. 

Angola,  387,  390. 

Annam,  383. 

Anne,  Queen  of  England,  254. 

VAnuce  Terrible,  211. 

Annual  Register,  94. 

Antwerp,  358,  460,  475. 

Apprentices,  46. 

Arabi  Pasha,  375. 

Arabian  Nights,  435. 

Argand,  44. 

Argonne  Forest,  493,  494. 

Aristocracy,  54-6. 

Aristotle,  336. 

Arkwright,  Richard,  46. 

Armentieres,  490. 

Armies,  in  earlier  times,  123,  124; 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  124-7; 
growth  of  in  Europe,  425. 

Armistice  (1918),  495. 


557 


558 


INDEX 


"Army  of  Maneuver,"  492. 

Army  System,  reformed  in  FVance,  215. 

Arras,  490. 

Article  10,  513. 

Article  23,  513. 

Artificial  Lighting,  9. 

Asia,  in  1920,  522,  523. 

Asiatic  Russia,  285. 

Asiatic  Turkey,  434,  435. 

Asquith,  H.  H.,  249,  261. 

Association  Cultuelle,  229. 

Association  of  the  Congo,  370. 

Association  of  Worship,  229. 

Astronomy,  69. 

Ateliers  Nationaux,  77,  78. 

Athenians,  34. 

.\tlantic  Ocean,  passage  across,  10. 

Atlantis,  371. 

Augsburg,  15. 

Ausgleich,  27,  33,  108;  terms  of,  109; 
difficulties  attending  renewals  of, 
306,  307. 

Australia,  380. 

Austria,  abolition  of  serfdom  in,  25; 
Revolution  of  1848  in,  27,  106;  con- 
stitution proclaimed  in,  27;  suf- 
frage in,  32,  33;  position  of  in  the 
first  half  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, 106;  in  earlier  times,  108; 
peoples  of,  108;  defeated  by  France 
and  by  Prussia,  109;  rules  part 
of  Italy,  113,  114;  takes  part  in 
the  war  about  Schleswig-Holstein, 
128,  129;  army  of  in  the  Austro- 
Prussian  War,  130;  beginning  of, 
193,  433;  decline  of,  211;  in  the 
seventeenth  and  eighteenth  cen- 
turies, 304;  becomes  part  of  the 
Dual  Monarchy,  304;  industrial  de- 
velopment in,  306,  307;  provinces 
of,  310;  peoples  of,  311;  fate  of, 
517,  521. 

Austria-Hungary,  establishment  of, 
108,  304,  305;  rivalry  of  with  Rus- 
sia, 175,  176,  178;  makes  an  agree- 
ment with  the  German  Empire  and 
Russia,  175;  alliance  of  with  the 
German  Empire,  179,  313;  helps  to 
form  the  Triple  Alliance,  179-185; 
relations  of  with  the  German  Em- 
pire, 197,  198;  diversity  of  races  in, 
284;  relations  of  with  Russia,  293, 
313;  policy  of,  304,  305;  history  of, 
305-15;  parts  of,  310-12;  character 
of,  312;  foreign  policy  of,  312-15; 
relations  of  with  Servia,  315;  pro- 
tects Turkey  from  Russian  ag- 
gression, 318;  acquires  Bosnia  and 


Herzegovina,  324,  333,  405-8,  436; 
in  the  Balkan  Crisis  of  1912-13, 
416,  417;  desires  to  attack  Servia 
in  1913,  418;  outlets  of,  428;  ulti- 
matum of  to  Servia,  440;  makes 
war  on  Servia,  442,  444;  surrenders 
to  the  Allies,  494;  dissolution  of, 
516;  socialism  in,  534. 

Austrian  Empire,  105. 

Austrian  Note  to  Servia,  400,  440, 
441. 

Austrians,  defeated  in  Poland,  467; 
lose  Przemysl,  468;  help  to  defeat 
the  Russians  at  the  Dunajec,  468; 
help  to  conquer  Servia,  469,  470; 
invade  Italy,  477;  defeat  the  Italians 
at  Caporetto,  484;  overwhelmed  by 
the  Italians,  493,  494. 

Austro-Italian  Frontier,  483. 

Austro-Prussian  War,  107,  114,  130, 
131,  308. 

Azov,  Sea  oU  317. 

Babeuf,  75. 

Bacon,  Roger,  40. 

Baden,  government  in,  165. 

Bagdad  Railway,  195,  196,  207,  313, 
435,  436. 

Bakunin,  Mikhail,  279,  280;  on 
equality,  529;  career  of,  530. 

Balance  of  Power,  95. 

Balkan  Crisis  of  1912-13,  416,  417. 

Balkan  League,  326. 

Balkan  States,  relations  of  with  Aus- 
tria-Hungary, 314,  315;  growth  of, 
324;  intrigues  of  in  Macedonia,  325, 
326;  unite  against  Turkey,  326;  de- 
velopment of,  331-41. 

Balkan  Wars,  313,  315,  327-31,  416, 
417. 

Balkans,  slight  progress  of  industrial- 
ism in,  54;  changes  in,  206;  ambi- 
tions of  Austria-Hungary  in,  312; 
the  German  Empire  and  Austria- 
Hungary  strive  for  predominance 
in,  3\3;  conquered  by  the  Turks, 
316;  Turkish  ride  in,  316,  317; 
rivalry  of  the  Great  Powers  in,  318, 
435,  436;  the  danger  spot  of  Eu- 
rope, 325;  political  situation  in,  in 
1912-13,  417,  418;  the  German  Em- 
pire desires  to  control,  434,  435. 

Ball,  John,  74. 

"Baltic  Barons,"  286. 

Baltic  Provinces,  286,  288,  522,  543. 

Baltic  Sea,  13;  under  Swedish  control, 
363;  Russia  and  Germany  on,  428. 

Baluchistan,  378. 


INDEX 


559 


Bapaume,  476. 

Barcelona,  5iJ3 

Bathing,  43. 

Bavaria,  government  in,  165. 

Bazaine,  I'Sii. 

Beaconsfield,  Earl  of,  240. 

Bebei,  August,  533,  534. 

Belfort,  138,458,4()1. 

Belgians,  re.si.st  the  German  invaders, 
459,  4(50;  help  to  break  the  Hinden- 
burg  Line,  493,  494. 

Belgium,  suffrage  in,  82;  Indu.strial 
Revolution  in,  54,  58;  neutraliza- 
tion of,  118,  359;  separation  of  from 
Holland,  118;  in  1870,  119;  joined 
with  Holland,  355,  358,  359,  374; 
becomes  independent,  8,56,  359; 
earlier  history  of,  358;  conditions 
in,  359,  3()0;  obtains  the  Congo 
country,  392;  violation  of  the  neu- 
trality of,  440;  invasion  of  by  the 
Germans,  459,  4(K);  German  meth- 
ods in,  485;  war  relief  for,  485;  in 
1920,  519. 

Benedict  XIV,  Pope,  346. 

Berchtold,  Count,  421,  442. 

Berlin,  voting  in,  147;  growth  of,  153 

Berlin  Conference,  376,  391. 

Bernhardi,  General  von,  438. 

Bessarabia,  337.  338,  522. 

Bethmann-IIollweg,  von,  446. 

Bhutan,  379. 

Bible,  70,  72,  88. 

Bieberstein,  von,  407,  408. 

Birtli  Rate,  in  France,  231;  decline  of, 
231;  in  Italy,  348,  431;  in  European 
countries,  430,  431. 

Biscay,  Bay  of,  12. 

Bismarck,  Count  Otto  von,  32; 
speech  of,  94;  enters  the  Prussian 
ministry,  126;  plans  to  obtain 
Schleswig  and  Holstein,  128.  129; 
diplomacy  of  before  the  Austro- 
Prussian  War,  129;  opposes  Napo- 
leon III,  132;  diplomacy  of  before 
the  Franco-German  War,  132-4; 
in  the  Franco-German  War,  138; 
fiscal  policy  of,  155;  contest  of  with 
the  Roman  Catholics,  159,  160; 
with  the  .social i.st.s,  101,  162;  insti- 
tutes state  s(X'ialism  in  the  German 
Empire,  102,  163;  on  the  position 
of  the  German  Empire,  173;  tasks 
of,  173,  174;  diplomacy  of,  175-87; 
at  the  Congress  of  Berlin,  178;  great 
success  of  the  foreign  policy  of, 
184,  185;  pa.sses  from  power,  188; 
great   achievements   of,    188,    189; 


methods  of,  189;  failure  of,  190;  on 
another  war  with  France,  234,  235; 
the  passing  of,  235;  reveals  intri- 
gues of  Nap<jle<jn  III  lonceraing 
Belgium.  '{59;  encourages  French 
colcjiiiul  enterprioc,  383;  friend  of 
La.s.salle,  533. 

Bjijrko,  Secret  Treaty  of.  402. 

"Black  Hundreds,"  iUM. 

Black  Sea,  11,12,  14,428. 

Blanc,  Ixjuis,  77,  78,  79. 

Blan(|ui,  Adolphe.  40,  40. 

Bloc,  219. 

"Blood  and  Iron."  189. 

"  Board  Schmls,"  248 

Boer  War,  201,  377. 

Boers,  376. 

Bohemia,  306,  310,  507. 

lidnheiiki,  22;  hatred  of  for  the 
bourgeoisie,  56;  in  the  (Jreat  War, 
482.  537;  origin  of,  540;  ideas  of, 
540,  541;  assisted  by  the  Germans, 
541;  accept  the  Treaty  of  Brest- 
Litovsk,  542,  543;  system  of  in 
Russia.  543,  544;  regarded  with 
suspicion  in  other  countries,  544; 
at  war  with  Poland,  544;  defeat 
counter-revolut ionary  attempts, 
544,  545;  strength  of,  545,  546. 

Bolshevist  Propaganda  in  Germany, 
495. 

Bordeaux,  461. 

Borneo,  391. 

Bosnia,  acquired  by  Austria-Hungary, 
178,  313,  315,  323,  324;  annexed 
by  Austria-Hungary,  324,  333.  405- 
8,  435;  lost  by  Austria  and  Hun- 
gary, 510. 

Bosnia-Herzegovina,  310. 

Bosnia-Herzegovina  Crisis,  405-8. 

Bosporus,  12. 

Boulanger,  General,  224,  225. 

Boulanger  Affair,  235. 

Bourbons,  restoration  of  in  France,  24; 
rule  of  in  France,  104;  family  of,  217; 
rule  of  in  Italy,  346;  in  Spain,  350. 

Bourgeoi.m;  in  the  old  Regime,  8; 
become  an  industrial  aristocracy  in 
the  nineteenth  century,  10;  in 
France,  20,  105;  in  the  French 
Revolution,  22;  rise  of,  55;  pre- 
dominance of  after  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  55,  56;  triumph  of  in 
France  in  1848,  78;  Marx  and 
Engels  on,  81;  in  Russia,  110;  sup- 
press the  Commune  in  Paris,  214; 
overthrow  of  desired  by  the  Bol- 
shetnki.  541,  543. 


560 


INDEX 


Boxer  Outbreak,  294. 

Boyen,  125. 

Brazil,  slavery  in,  25,  271;  independ- 
ence of,  353';  held  by  the  Dutch,  390. 

Breach  of  Contract,  in  Russia,  282. 

Brest-Litovsk,  469. 

Briey  Basin,  153. 

British,    defeated    in    Belgium,    4G0; 
help  to  defeat  the  Germans  at  the 
Marne,    461;    help    to    defend    the 
Channel   Ports,   464;   failure   of  at 
the  Dardanelles,  470-72;  keep  con- 
trol of  the  sea,  472-4;   defeat  the 
German  fleet  off  Jutland,  473;  in 
the  Battle  of  the  Somme,  470,  477 
capture  Vimy  and   Messines,  480 
fail  to  break  the  German  lines,  481 
great    defeat    of    in    Picardy,    490 
break  the   Hindenburg  Line,   493, 
494. 

British  East  Africa,  376. 

British  Empire,  formation  of,  95 
government  of,  97,  98,  380-82 
extent  of,  371;  growth  of,  371-9 
civil  war  in,  373;  character  of,  379, 
380;  greatness  of,  379,  380;  weak- 
ness of,  380;  peoples  of,  380;  in 
1920,  523. 

British  Grand  Fleet,  473,  474,  479. 

British  Labor  Committee,  251. 

British  North  America,  374. 

British  People,  sympathy  of  for 
France,  174;  attitude  of  toward 
the  German  people,  174,  175. 

British  South  Africa  Company,  370, 
377. 

Brockdorff-Rantzau,  Count  von,  498. 

Brusilov,  General,  477. 

Brussels,  460. 

Bryce,  Viscount,  498. 

Budapest,  305. 

Buddhists,  in  the  British  Empire, 
380. 

Buffon,  70. 

Building,  42. 

Bukowina,  310,  314. 

Bulgaria,  relations  of  with  Russia, 
315;  with  the  Teutonic  Powers,  315; 
conquered  by  the  Turks,  316;  re- 
bellion in  against  the  Turks,  321; 
Turkish  atrocities  in,  323;  freed 
from  the  Turks,  323,  324;  complete 
independence  of,  324;  in  the  Balkan 
Wars,  327-31,  340;  history  of,  339, 
341;  joins  the  Teutonic  Powers  in 
the  Great  War,  470;  surrenders  to 
the  Allies,  493;  losses  of,  517. 

"Bulgarian  Atrocities,"  339. 


Bulgarian  Exarchate,  341. 

Bulgar.s,  early  history  cf,  339;  origin 
of,  341;  join  the  Teutonic  Powers  in 
tke  Great  War,  470;  help  to  con- 
quer Servia,  470. 

Bulow,  von,  143,  183. 

Bundesrath,  145,  146. 

Bureaucracy  in  Rus?ia,  300. 

Burma,  394. 

Butt,  Isaac,  261. 

Byron,  Lord,  13,  320. 

Cabet,  Etienne,  79. 

Cabinet  Government,  97,  144. 

Cables,  Submarine,  11. 

"Cadets,"  300. 

Calais,  464. 

Calvin,  80. 

Calvinists,  18,  28. 

Cambodia,  383. 

Cambrai,  476. 

Cambridge,  247. 

Campbell-Bannerman,  Sir  Henry,  249. 

Canada,  380. 

Canada  Government  Act  of  1840,  97. 

Canning,  Stratford,  117. 

Canossa,  160. 

Canterbury  Cathedral,  14.   . 

Cantons,  Swiss,  360,  361. 

Cape  Colony,  374,  376. 

Cape  of  Good  Hope,  375. 

Capitalism,  in  the  older  industrial 
system,  47;  in  the  Industrial  Rev- 
olution, 48;  abolition  of  desired  by 
socialists,  81 ;  syndicalist  war  against, 
532. 

Caporetto,  Battle  of,  484. 

"Capping  the  Line,"  297. 

Carbonari,  114,  320. 

Carinthia,  310. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  193. 

Carniola,  310,  510. 

Carpathian  Mountains,  12,  13,  15, 
16;  struggle  for  the  passes  of,  468. 

Carso  Plateau,  483. 

Carthage,  370,  451. 

CartvsTight,  Edmund,  46. 

Cartwright,  John,  30. 

Caspian  Sea,  11,  12. 

Castelar,  Emilio,  344,  350. 

Catalonia,  35. 

Catherine  II,  Tsaritsa  of  Russia,  318. 

Catholic  Emancipation,  258. 

Catholic  Party  in  the  German  Empire, 
160. 

Caucasia,  286,  287,  321,  522. 

Cavour,  Count  Camillo  di,  114. 

Celebes,  391. 


INDEX 


561 


Celtic  Language,  37. 

Celtic  People,  -156,  257. 

Center  Party,  IGO. 

Central  Europe,  in  the  first  half  of 
the  nineteenth  (enlury,  105-7. 

Central  Pcsition  of  the  Teutonic 
Powers  in  the  Great  ^Va^,  455,  450. 

Cervantes,  38i. 

Ceylon,  357,  374. 

Chamber  of  Deputies,  312. 

Champagne,  battle  in,  475. 

Champlain,  Samuel  de,  384. 

Channel  Ports,  4G4,  475,  490,  492. 

Charleroi,  460. 

Charles,  Prince  of  Hohenzollem- 
Sigmaringen,  337. 

Charles  Albert,  King  of  Sardinia,  345. 

Charter,  of  France,  26,  31. 

Chartism,  78. 

Chartists,  76,78. 

Chateau-Thierry,  491. 

Chcmirt  des  Dames,  481,  491- 

Child  Labor,  50,  51. 

Children  in  the  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion. 50,  51. 

China,  decay  of,  293;  territory  of 
seized  by  other  Powers,  293,  294; 
in  ancient  times,  370;  German  rights 
in,  515;  Austrian  rights  in,  517. 

Chinese,  in  the  British  Empire,  380. 

Chinese-Japanese  War,  293^ 

Christ,  teachings  of,  439. 

Christianity,  suppressed  in  France, 
22;  effects  of  upon  the  pcsition  of 
women,  62;  communism  in,  73,  74. 

Christians,  treatment  of  in  the  Turk- 
ish Empire,  317. 

Church,  lands  of  confiscated  in  France 
during  the  French  Revolution,  21; 
measures  against  in  France,  22; 
communism  in,  73,  74;  in  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  84,  226;  during  the  Refor- 
mation, 226;  in  Lutheran  coun- 
tries, 226;  in  England,  226;  in 
Catholic  countries,  226. 

Church  and  State,  in  the  German  Em- 
pire, 158;  in  the  Middle  Ages,  226;  in 
modern  times,  226;  in  France,  226, 
227;  separation  of  in  France,  227- 
30;  in  Italy,  345,  346;  in  Spain,  351; 
in  Portugal,  354. 

Church  of  England,  90,  98. 

Church  of  Ireland,  99,  260. 

Cinema,  10. 

Cities,  increase  of  size  and  power  of 
after  the  Industrial  Revolution,  60, 
61;  consequences  of,  61,  62. 

Citizen  Armies,  in  France,  138,  139. 


Civil  Equality.  28 

Civil  War,  American,  101. 

Classes,  Struggle  of,  81. 

Cleanlines.s,  43. 

Clemeiueau,  481.  501,  511,  512. 

Clericalism,  in  I'Vance,  227. 

Coal,  41.  45.  153. 

C()aliti(jn,  First,  again.st  France,  35. 

Cochin  China,  383. 

Code  Napoleon,  23. 

Colonial  Empire,  of  Great  Britain, 
97,  98,  371-82,  523;  of  Spain,  115; 
of  France,  236,  237,  382-5;  of  Ger- 
many, 385-9. 

Colonial  Populations,  treatment  of, 
393,  394. 

Colonies,  of  Great  Britain,  371-82;  of 
France,  .382-5;  of  the  (ierman 
Empire,  385-9;  of  Italy,  389,  390; 
of  Spain,  390;  of  Portugal,  390;  of 
Holland,  390,  391;  of  Belgium,  391, 
392. 

Command  of  the  Sea,  in  the  Great 
War,  456,  472-4. 

Commercial  Development,  in  the 
German  Empire,  155. 

Communal  Ownership  of  Land,  in 
Russia,  272. 

Commune  of  Paris,  80,  83,  105,  211, 
212-14,279,530,534,535. 

Communes,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  213;  in 
modern  France,  213. 

Communism,  in  earlier  times,  73,  74; 
in  the  French  Revolution,  74,  75; 
belief  in  advanced  by  the  Industrial 
Revolution,  75,  76;  in  England,  76; 
in  France,  70-8;  development  of  by 
Marx  and  Engels,  70-81;  doctrines 
of,  81-t. 

Communist  League,  79. 

Communist  Manifesto,  56,  60,  79,  80, 
81,  82,  529. 

Compulsory  Military  Service.  in 
France,  124,  215.  233;  in  Prussia, 
125-7;  in  Austria-Hungary,  307. 

Concordat  of  1801,  23,  86,  226,  227,  229. 

Conference  of  London,  418. 

Congo  Free  State,  391.  392. 

Congress  of  Berlin,  178,  181,  265,  313, 
319,  323,  324,  332,  333,  335,  339,  374. 

Congress  of  Paris  (1856).  265,  336. 

Congress  of  Paris  (1919),  public  inter- 
est in,  499;  assembling  of,  502,  503; 
procedure  at,  503,  504;  questions 
to  be  discussed  at,  504-11;  business 
of,  511,  512. 

Congress  of  Vienna,  24.  86,  102»  113, 
360. 


562 


INDEX 


Conservatives,  248. 

Constantinople,   12,   14;  captured  by 

the   Turks,    116,    316;    desired    by 

Russia,  292;  controlling  position  of, 

428;  question  of,   511;  left  to  the 

Turks,  518. 
Constitution  of  1791  (France),  20,  30. 
Constitution  of  the  Year  I  (France), 

362. 
Constitution  of  the  Year  III  (France), 

22,  31. 
Constitution      of     the     Y'ear     VIII 

(France),  23,  31. 
Constitution  of  1812  (Spain),  26,  27. 
Constitution  of   1814   (Norway),   33, 

364. 
Constitution  of  1831   (Belgium),   32, 

359. 
Constitution   of    1848    (Switzerland), 

33,  362 
Constitution  of  1848  (Holland),  357. 
Constitution  of  1849  (Denmark),  366. 
Constitution  of  1850  (Prussia),  27. 
Constitution  of  1863  (Sweden),  365. 
Constitution  of  1875  (France),  217. 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  30. 
"Constitutional  Democrats,"  300. 
Constitutional    Progress    in    Europe, 

25-7. 
Constitutions  and  Government,  220. 
Control  of  the  Sea,  in  the  Great  War, 

472-4. 
Convention  of  Gastein,  129. 
"Conversations"   between   Germany 

and  France,  412. 
Copernicus,  68. 
Corn  Laws,  57,  98,  152. 
Corrupt  Practices  Act,  241. 
Cortes,  in  Spain,  351;  in  Portugal,  353. 
Cossacks,  270. 
Council  of  State,  in  Russia,  299;  in 

Switzerland,  361. 
Council  of  Trent,  90. 
Council  of  the  Vatican,  90. 
Counter-Reformation,  158. 
Counter-revolutionary  Movements  in 

Russia,  544,  545. 
Courland,  286. 
Covenant  of  the  League  of  Nations, 

512-14. 
Cracow,  468. 
Creation.  69,  70,  72. 
Crete,  335. 
Crimea,  545. 

Crimean  War,  103,  111,  118,  318,  404. 
Crinoline,  7. 
Crises  in   Recent   European   history, 

399,  400. 


Crispi,  Francesco,  344. 

Croatia,  510. 

Croatia-Slavonia,  310,  313. 

Crompton,  Samuel,  46. 

Crown  Prince,  of  the  German  Empire, 

492. 
Cuba,  390. 
Cyprus,  374. 
Cyrenaica,  390. 
Czecho-Slovak  Troops,  508. 
Czecho-Slovakia,  515,  516,  521,  522. 
Czechs,  310,  311,  507,  508. 

Dahomey,  384. 

Dalmatia,  310.  313,  349,  510. 

Danes,  256. 

Danish  War,  127-9. 

Danish  West  Indies,  366. 

Dannevirke,  128. 

Dante,  16,  68. 

Danton,  22. 

Danube  River,  14,  428. 

Danubian  Principalities,  321,  336,  337. 

Danzig,  48,  508,  514. 

Dardanelles,  12;  attack  upon,  470-2. 

Darwin,  Charles,  71,  80,  81,  87. 

De  Natura  Rerum,  70. 

De  Orbium  Ccelestium  Revdutionibus, 
68. 

Declaration  of  Independence,  30. 

Declaration  of  London,  409. 

Declaration  of  the  Rights  of  Man 
(French),  17,  28. 

Degeneracy,  51. 

Delcasse,  Theophile,  400,  403. 

"Delegations,"  305. 

Democracy,  in  Europe,  9;  ideas  of 
in  the  French  Revolution,  21; 
among  the  Greeks,  28;  little  idea 
of  in  the  eighteenth  century,  28;  in 
ancient  times,  28;  in  the  .' even- 
teen  th  century,  28;  at  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  29,  30;  during 
the  French  Revolution,  30;  ad- 
vanced by  the  Industrial  Revolution, 
60,  61;  slow  progress  of  in  the 
German  Empire,  164-6;  making 
the  world  safe  for,  498,  499. 

"Democratic  Control"  of  Industry, 
251. 

Denikine,  General,  544,  545. 

Denmark,  suffrage  in,  33;  troubles  of 
concerning  Schleswig  and  Holstein, 
127-9;  in  earlier  times,  362,  363; 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  365,  366. 

Descent  of  Man,  71. 

Deut^ches  Reich,  144. 

Deutscfdand  und  der  Nachste  Krieg,  438. 


INDEX 


563 


Diderot.  20.  228. 

Diplomatic  Revolution  of  1904-7, 
201.  202. 

"Direct  Action."  251. 

Directory,  75. 

Dincourse  Conceniitig  Inequality  among 
Men,  74. 

Dissenters,  31.  98. 

Divina  Cammedia,  08. 

Divine  Right.  9,  20.  147,  148.  151. 

Dobrudja,  3JJ7. 

Dbllinger.  159. 

Domestic  System  of  Manufacturing. 
46,  47,  48. 

Donnersmarck,  Count  von,  402,  403. 

Drang  nach  Osten,  194. 

Dreadnaught,  203. 

Dreikaiserbuud,  175. 

Dreyfus  Affair,  225,  226. 

"Dropping  the  Pilot,"  188. 

Dual  Alliance  (Frame  and  Russia), 
197;  terms  of,  210;  formation  of, 
235,  236,  291;  relations  of  Great 
Britain  to,  266;  position  of,  398; 
weakened,  402. 

Dual  Alliance  (German  Empire  and 
Austria-Hungary),  179;  treaties  of. 
182. 

Dual  Control,  of  Egypt,  375. 

Dual  Monarchy,  founded,  108,  304, 
305;  career  of,  305-15;  parts  of, 
310-12;  character  of,  312;  foreign 
policy  of,  312-15;  end  of,  521 . 

"Dualism,"  in  Austria-Hungary,  305. 

Dublin,  rebellion  in,  203,  264;  indus- 
trial disorders  in,  533. 

Dulcigno,  332. 

Duma,  First  Imperial,  299,  300; 
Second.  301;  Third,  301,  539. 

Dumas  (Councils),  273,  282. 

Dunajec  River,  408. 

Dunkirk,  464. 

Durazzo,  327,  333,  416,  417. 

Dutch,  rise  of,  354.  355. 

Dutch  Colonial  Administration,  357. 

Dutch  Colonie.s,  390,  391. 

Dutch  East  India  Company,  370. 

Dutch  Guiana,  391. 

Earth,  Age  of,  71. 
East  India  Company,  372,  374. 
East  Prussia,  145. 
Eastern  Roman  Empire,  316. 
Eastern  Rumelia,  340. 
Ebert,  President  of  the  German  Re- 
public, 520. 
Ecclesiastics,  Appointment  of,  227. 
Education,  spread  of  in  the  nineteenth 


ctiitury,  30;  advanced  by  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution,  <MJ,  01;  re- 
form of  in  I'riiiicf,  ii'il,  'i-ii;  clerical 
influence  iipcin  in  IVunce,  227; 
partly  controlled  by  religious  orders, 
228;  partly  controlled  by  the 
Church  in  Great  Rritain,  247;  im- 
provement of  in  Great  Britain,  247, 
248;  lack  of  in  Russia.  288;  in 
Au-stria-Hungarv,  300. 

Education  Act  of  1870,  247,  248. 

Edward  VII.  King  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland.  202.  401. 

Egypt,  370,  374;  acquired  by  the 
British,  374.  375;  condition  of  the 
jx'ople  in.  394. 

Einkreinung,  160,  205. 

Electoral  Law,  in  Russia,  301. 

Electoral  Reform,  in  the  Vnited  King- 
dom. 31,  32,  240,  241. 

Electoral  Reform  Law  of  1832,  96;  of 
1807,  96.  101,  240;  of  1884,  241; 
of  1918.  246. 

Electricity.  41. 

Elizabeth.  Empress  of  Austria.  308. 

Emancipation  of  the  Serfs  in  Russia. 
270.  271.  272;  results  of.  272,  273. 

Emigration,  from  Ireland,  259;  from 
Italy,  348. 

Empire  of  .\ustria,  310;  see  Austria. 

Ems  Dispatch.  133,  189. 

Engels,  Friedrich,  79,  80. 

England,  geographical  position  of, 
13;  nationality  in,  34;  increase  of 
population  in,  56;  agriculture  in, 
57;  changes  caused  by  the  Indus- 
trial Revolution  in,  58;  position 
of  women  in,  63;  in  earlier  times. 
94;  united  with  Scotland.  95;  for- 
eign policy  of,  95;  the  Church  in, 
226;  conquered  by  the  Danes,  363. 

English,  The,  build  up  a  great  empire. 
371-9. 

English  Channel,  13,  428. 

English  Soldiers,  in  the  Middle  Ages. 
95. 

English-speaking  Peoples,  civil  wars 
among,  100;  relations  between.  100. 
101;  solidarity  of,  524;  duty  of.  524. 

An  Englishman's  Home,  203.  204. 

Entente,  between  Russia  and  France, 
235. 

Entente  Cordiale,  formation  of.  202. 
384.  399.  400,  401,  432;  settlement 
of  the  Egyptian  question  by,  375; 
strengthened,  403. 

Epirus,  335. 

Erin.  256. 


564 


INDEX 


Esthonia,  286. 

Etats  Generaux,  19. 

Eton,  247. 

Europe,  importance  of,  7;  in  the  Old 
Regime,  7-9;  conditions  in  in  1870, 
7,  9,  10;  geography  of,  11-14; 
great  plain  of,  12;  rivers  of,  12;  old 
buildings  and  remains  in,  14,  15; 
historical  associations  of,  15,  16; 
conditions  in  before  the  French 
Revolution,  17-20;  growth  of  the 
power  of,  369-71;  divided  between 
great  rival  combinations,  399; 
great  crises  in,  399,  400,  401-19, 
440-4;  just  before  the  Great  War, 
419. 

Evolution,  70-3. 

Exhaustion,  of  the  combatants  in  the 
Great  War,  489,  490. 

Fabian  Society,  535,  536. 

Factory  Legislation  in  Great  Britain, 

249. 
Falk  Laws,  159. 
Falkland   Islands,    373;   battle   near, 

473. 
Fashoda,  237,  376,  384. 
Fashoda  Dispute,  194. 
Fathers  and  Sons,  279. 
Federal  Assembly,  Swiss,  361. 
Fenians,  99,  261. 
Ferdinand,    Prince    of    Saxe-Coburg, 

340. 
Feudal  System,  34,  54. 
"Financial  Mobilization,"  415. 
Finland,    acquired    by    Russia,    118, 

285,  364;  lost  to  Russia,  287,  522, 

543;    privileges    withdrawn    from, 

288;  constitution  restored  to,  299. 
First  Balkan  War,  315,  319;  causes  of, 

326,  327;  course  of,  327-9;  effects 

of,  416. 
Fiume,  428,  506. 
Flanders,  58,  481. 
Florence,  15,  345. 
Flottenrerein,  200,  204. 
Foch,   General,   afterwards   Marshal, 

462,  491,  493. 
Folkething,  366. 

Foreign  Affairs,  Control  of,  501. 
Forstner,  Lieutenant  von,  108. 
42-Centimeter  Guns,  460. 
Fourier,  77,  78. 
"Fourteen  Points,"  500-2. 
Francs-tirevrs,  139. 
France,   Greek  and   Roman   remains 

in,    14;    conditions    in    during   the 

Old   Regime,    19;  constitutions  of. 


26;  development  of  democracy  in, 
29,  30;  franchise  in,  30,  31 ;  national- 
ism in,  34,  35;  Industrial  Revolution 
in,  53,  104;  land  in  bought  by  the 
peasants,  75;  growth  of  socialism  in, 
76-8,  104,  105;  in  1870,  101-4, 
134,  135;  earlier  history  of,  102-4; 
relations  of  with  Prussia,  103,  104; 
social  progress  in,  104,  105;  na- 
tional armies  of  in  the  French 
Revolution,  124;  army  of  in  1870, 
134,  135;  in  the  Franco-German 
War,  136-9;  accepts  the  Treaty 
of  Frankfort,  139-41;  downfall  of  in 
1870,  210;  disasters  suffered  by  in 
1870-1,  211;  inherent  greatness  of, 
211,  212;  recovery  of,  212;  com- 
munard attempt  in,  212-14;  re- 
public proclaimed  in,  212,  215; 
republic  established  in,  215,  217; 
government  of,  217-19;  develop- 
ment of  self-government  in,  219, 
220;  reform  of  education  in,  221, 
222;  higher  education  in,  222,  223; 
material  progress  in,  223;  plottings 
of  the  Monarchists  in,  224;  domes- 
tic crises  in,  224-6;  Church  and 
State  in,  226,  227;  separation  of 
Church  and  State  in,  227-30;  na- 
tional wealth  in,  230;  standard  of 
living  and  birth  rate  in,  231-3; 
high  civilization  in,  233;  foreign 
relations  of,  233-7;  becomes  a 
partner  in  the  Dual  Alliance,  235; 
relations  of  with  Great  Britain,  236, 
237,  265,  266,  400,  401;  interest 
of  in  Egypt,  375;  colonial  empire  of, 
382-5;  relations  of  with  Germany, 
400;  assurance  of  strengthened, 
410;  does  not  yield  to  Germany  in 
1911,  412,  413;  nearly  overwhelmed 
by  the  Germans  in  1914,  460,  461; 
German  practices  in,  485;  in  1920, 
519;  syndicalism  in,  532;  socialism 
in,  534. 

Franchise,  in  France  in  1791,  20; 
in  the  United  States,  SO;  in  France, 
30,  31;  in  Great  Britain,  30;  exten- 
sion of  in  central  and  southern 
Europe,  32,  33;  in  northern  Europe, 
33;  extension  of  in  the  United  King- 
dom, 96;  in  Russia,  299,  301;  in 
Austria,  310,  311;  in  Hungary,  312; 
in  Italy,  345;  in  Spain,  356;  in  Hol- 
land, 357;  in  Belgium,  359,  360; 
in  Norway,  364,  365;  in  Denmark, 
366,  367. 

Franco-German  War,  causes  of,  131-4; 


INDEX 


5G5 


course  of,  131-f);  rosults  of,  139-41; 
immediate  cause  of,  '.I'A). 

Franco-l'russian  War,  xce  Franco- 
German   War. 

Fraukfort  Parliament,  27,  107. 

Franz  Ferdinand,  Archduke,  308, 
814,  422,  440. 

Franz  Josef,  Emperor-King  of  .\ustria- 
Hunpary,  808. 

Fraternity,  88,  84. 

Frederick  III,  (icrnian  Emperor,  M!). 

Frederick  the  Creaf,  IS!). 

Free  Negroes,  271. 

"Freedom  of  the  Seas,"  501,  /502, 
,'304. 

Freeman,  E.  A.,  193. 

French,  The,  in  the  Great  War,  await 
the  Ccrman  attack,  4.W,  4.'"j9; 
defeated  in  Al.sacc  and  in  Lorraine, 
4.';9;  defeated  in  ncl<,'ium,  4(i0; 
retreat  of,  400,  4(il;  defeat  tlie 
Germans  at  the  Marnc,  4G1-8; 
drive  the  Germans  hack  to  the 
Aisne,  408;  Iielp  to  defend  tJie  Chan- 
nel Ports,  4(i4;  faihire  of  at  tlie  Dar- 
danelles, 470-72;  help  to  keep  con- 
trol of  the  sea.s,  478;  fail  in  the  Cham- 
pagne, 475;  defend  Verdun,  475, 
470;  in  the  Battle  of  tlie  Somme, 
470,  477;  fail  to  break  the  (Jcrman 
line,  481;  great  defeat  of  at  Cheinin 
des  Dames.  490,  491. 

French  Army,  increased,  419. 

French  Cochin  China,  883. 

French  Colonial  Empire,  382-5;  ex- 
tent of,  884,  885;  character  of,  385. 

French  Congo,  884,  415. 

French  Culture,  in  the  eighteenth 
eenturj',  19. 

French  (iuiana,  382. 

French  Revolution,  17,  20-2;  causes 
of,  19,  20;  results  of,  28-7;  develop- 
ment of  nationalism  during,  35; 
retards  the  Industrial  Revolution 
on  the  Continent,  58;  affects  the 
position  of  women  only  indirectlv, 
62,  03;  affects  the  Church,  8(1; 
effects  of  in  England,  90;  slight 
effect  of  in  Russia,  110;  effects  of  in 
Sl)ain,  115;  agrarian  consequences 
of  in  France,  231;  women's  move- 
ment in,  242. 

French  Somaliland,  383. 

French  Yellow  Rook  about  the  Dual 
Alliance,  230. 

"Fright fulness,"  480. 

Fulton,  Robert,  42. 

"Fundamental  Laws"  in  Russia,  300. 


Gaelic  Language,  108. 

Gaelic  League,  208. 

Galicia,  810,  Lill,  407,  408. 

Galileo,  10,  487. 

Gallipoli,  470-2. 

Garibaldi,  85,  114. 

Gas,  used  for  illuniinalion,  43. 

(Jcncral  Strike,  in  Russia,  298;  in 
Hclgiuiii,  800. 

General  \\orkingmen's  Association, 
538. 

Clinc.sis,  70. 

Geneva,  29,  80S. 

(k'ographical  Factors,  a  cau.se  of  tlie 
Great  War,  427-80. 

Geology.  71. 

(Jeorge  II,  King  of  Great  Britain  and 
of  Ireland,  870. 

George  111,  King  of  Great  Britain 
an.l  of  Ireland,  258,  370. 

George,  Ll.jyd,  108.  249,  252,  253, 
201,  201;  on  small  nations,  344;  at 
the  Congress  of  Paris.  504,  512. 

German  Army,  in  1918,  1,87;  increa.sed, 
419;  at  the  beginning  of  the  Great 
War,  451-4;  limited,  515. 

German  Colonial  Empire,  385-9. 

(Jcrnian  Colonies,  question  of,  505, 

Cierman  Conmianders,  452,  453. 

German  East  Africa,  380. 

German  Empire,  increase  of  popu- 
lation in,  57,  59,  232;  military 
.strength  of  increa.sed  by  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution,  59;  founding  of, 
141;  the  grand  age  of,  143-4; 
government  of,  144-0;  rulers  of, 
148-50;  system  of  government  in, 
150-2;  immense  economic  devclo|>- 
ment  in,  152-7;  growth  of  pojjula- 
tion  in,  157,  158;  domestic  prol>- 
lems  in,  158-02;  state  socialism  in, 
102-4;  slow  progress  of  democracy 
in,  1G4-7;  militarism  in,  167. 
108;  treatment  of  subject  races  in, 
lOS-71;  position  of  after  1871,  173; 
alliance  of  with  .\ustria-IIungary, 
179;  helj)s  to  make  the  Triple  .-Vlli- 
ance,  179-85;  renews  good  relations 
Milh  Russia,  IS.),  ISO;  new  genera- 
lion  rising  in,  187;  new  policy  takes 
shaj)e  in,  191,  192;  relations  of  with 
Great  Britain,  193,  198-207,  206, 
481-3;  with  Turkey,  198,  194,  818; 
with  Au.stria-Hungary,  197,  198, 
318;  nuiritime  (leveloi)ment  of,  199; 
naval  ambitions  of,  200;  naval  ex- 
pansion of,  200;  naval  program  of 
accelerated,  203;  policy  of  affected 


yG6 


INDEX 


by  changes  in  the  Balkans,  206; 
education  in,  m;  higher  education 
in,  2ii,  223;  rehitions  of  with  Rus- 
sia, 292,  293;  preeminence  of  in 
Europe,  398,  399;  imposing  posi- 
tion of  in  1909-11,  408,  409;  yields 
in  the  Morocco  Crisis  of  1911,  413- 
15;  bitterness  in  against  Great 
Ikitain,  416;  opposed  to  disarma- 
ment, 427;  promises  support  to 
Austria-Hungary,  442;  negotiations 
of  with  Russia,  443;  declares  war 
on  Russia,  444;  on  France,  444; 
violates  the  neutrality  of  Luxem- 
burg and  of  Belgium,  445,  446; 
revolution  in,  495;  losses  of  by  the 
Treaty  of  Versailles,  514,  515; 
end  of,  519,  520;  revolutions  in, 
520;  socialism  in,  533,  534;  weakened 
by  Bolshevism,  544. 

German  High  Seas  Fleet,  473,  474; 
sinking  of,  518. 

German  Methods  in  the  Great  War, 
485,  486. 

German  Naval  Laws,  431,  432. 

German  Officers,  452. 

German  People,  expansion  of  east 
and  southward,  193,  194. 

German  Railway  System,  454,  455. 

German  Republic,  520. 

German  Southwest  Africa,  386. 

German  System  of  Government,  150, 

151,  165,    160;   character   of,    151, 

152,  164,  166,  167. 
German  Trade,  155,  156. 
Germanic    Confederation,    106,    129, 

131. 
Germans,  military  triumphs  of,  122- 
41;  military  reputation  of,  123,  134; 
conduct  of  in  France  in  1870-1,  139; 
in  Russia,  280,  287;  in  Austria,  300, 
310;  rivalry  of  with  the  British  in 
Africa,  387;  disappointment  of 
about  colonial  acquisitions,  386, 
387;  character  and  ambitions  of, 
436,  437;  belief  of  in  their  racial 
superiority,  437;  glorification  of 
war  by,  437,  438;  arrogance  and 
ambition  of,  438;  doctrines  of,  439; 
advantages  of  in  the  Great  War, 
451-6;  defeat  the  French  in  Alsace 
and  in  Lorraine,  459;  invade  Bel- 
gium, 459;  advance  into  France, 
460,  461;  defeated  at  the  Marne, 
401-3;  great  success  of,  463,  404; 
fail  to  take  the  Channel  Ports, 
464;  defeat  the  Russians  at  Tannen- 
berg,  467;  defeat  the  Russians  at 


the  Dunajec,  468;  Invade  Russia, 
468,  469;  conquer  Servia,  469,  470; 
defeated   at   Jutland,    473;   fail   at 
Ypres,  475;  at  Verdun,  475,  476; 
in  the  Battle  of  the  Somme,  476, 
477;  check  the  Russians,  477,  478; 
submarine  warfare  of,  478-80;  re- 
treat of,  480;  hold  their  lines,  481; 
help  to  defeat  the  Italians  at  Cap- 
oretto,  484;  grand  offensive  of,  490, 
491;  fail  to  destroy  the  Allies,  491; 
overwhelmed    by    the    Allies,    493, 
494;     surrender,     495;     assist     the 
Bolsheviki,  541. 
Germany,    end    of    serfdom    in,    25; 
unification  of,  36;  Industrial  Revo- 
lution in,  54;  in  1920,  520,  521. 
Gibraltar,  12,  373. 
Giovine  Italia,  114. 
Girondists,  74. 

Gladstone,  W.  E.,  247,  261,  323,  369. 
Glasgow,  252. 
Gneisenau,  125. 
"God-fearing"  Men,  29. 
Godwin,  Mary,  242. 
Goidels,  256. 
Gold  Coast,  372. 
Gorizia,  477. 
Gortchakov,  179. 

Government,  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, 8;  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
9;    in    Europe   before   the    French 
Revolution,  18. 
Government     of    National     Defence 

(France),  proclamation  of,  210. 
"Governments,"  273. 
Grand  Army,  235. 
Gravelotte— St.  Privat,  136. 
Great  Britain,  government  in  in  the 
eighteenth  century,  18,  19;  consti- 
tution of,  25,  26;  franchise  in,  30; 
Industrial  Revolution  begins  in, 
44-6;  course  of  in,  40-53;  growth  of 
socialism  in,  76;  formation  of,  95; 
relations  of  with  the  United  States, 
100;  attitude  of  toward  the  German 
Empire,  174;  relations  of  with  the 
Triple  Alliance,  183;  with  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  193,  198-207,  431-3; 
enters  the  Entente  Cordiale  with 
France,  202;  makes  agreement  with 
Russia,  202;  seeks  a  good  under- 
standing with  the  German  Empire, 
205-7,  432,  433;  growth  of  popula- 
tion in,  232;  attitude  of  in  the  Affair 
of  1875,  234;  relations  of  with 
France,  236,  237,  400,  401;  electoral 
reform  in,  240,  241;  women's  suf- 


INDEX 


567 


frage  movement  in,  2n-fi;  posi- 
tion of  women  in,  24'2;  nforiii  of 
cdiiration  in,  247,  24S;  social  and 
economic  reforms  in,  24H,  24!); 
trade  unions  in,  24!),  2.'J0;  Lalior 
Party  in,  250,  251;  power  of  ],al)or 
in,  251;  distribution  of  weallii  in, 
252;  ownership  of  land  in,  252,  25.'5; 
constitutional  reform  in,  2515-0; 
relations  of  with  lrelan<l,  25(»-(i5; 
foreif,'n  relations  of,  205,  2(i();  rela- 
tions of  with  Hnssia,  2!).'{,  404;  liclps 
to  preserve  tlie  'J'lirkisli  I'lnipire, 
^IS;  makes  treaties  ahoiil  tlic  neu- 
trality of  Iklf^'ium,  aaO;  purchases 
conlrollinK  interest  in  the  Suez 
Canal,  ^75;  obtains  sj)here  of  in- 
fluence in  Persia,  ^7!);  rivalry  of 
with  Germany  in  Africa,  ;!S7; 
fear  of  the  (!erman  Kmi)ire  in,  410, 
4;52;  sui)i)orts  France  in  1!)11,  41.'5; 
dominant  position  of,  428,  42!); 
naval  conslruetion  in,  4152;  polic-y 
of  concerning  France,  4.'{.'5;  desires 
to  prevent  the  Great  War,  443; 
wishes  to  stay  out,  445;  promises 
assistance  to  France,  445;  declares 
war  on  the  German  Empire,  440; 
socialism  in,  5.'}5-7;  chance  for 
Holshevism  being  established  in, 
536. 

Great  Famine,  in  Ireland,  99,  259. 

Great  General  Staff,  German,  444, 
445. 

Great  Powers,  note  of  concerning  the 
status  quo  in  Kuropean  Turkey, 
327;  propose  mediation  in  the  First 
Balkan  War,  32.S;  seize  spheres  of 
influence  in  China,  378;  in  the  Bal- 
kan Crisis  of  1912-13,  410,  417. 

Great  Russians,  284,  289. 

Great  War,  industrial  power  in,  59, 
60;  women  of  Great  Britain  in,  240; 
possibility  of,  421,  422;  general 
causes  of  440-4;  immediate  causes 
of,  440-4;  lieginning  of,  444-0; 
declarations  of  hostilities  in,  450; 
<lestructiveness  of,  451;  opposing 
forces  in,  451-7;  German  plan  in, 
457,  458;  early  French  failures  in, 
459;  Germans  invade  Belgium,  459, 
400;  Germans  invade  France,  401; 
Battle  of  the  IMarne,  401-3;  strug- 
gle for  the  Channel  Ports,  4(>4; 
successes  of  the  Russians,  407; 
Russians  defeated  in  East  l^ussia, 
467;  fighting  in  the  east,  407,  408; 
Russians  defeated  at  the  Dunajee, 


408;  their  disastrous  retreat,  408, 
4(;9;  Sirvia  coiK|ucred,  40!),  470; 
(iallij)oli,  470-2;  Allies  k<'C[)  control 
of  the  sea,  472-4;  lialtlc  of  Julland, 
473;  fighting  on  the  vest  front, 
474,  475;  \erdun,  475,  470;  Battle 
of  the  Somme,  470,  477;  fighting 
on  the  Auslro-Italian  front,  477; 
llussian  offensive,  477,  478;  con- 
C|ucst  of  Rumania,  478;  work  of  the 
German  subinariiies,  47H-80;  fail- 
ures of  the  Allies  in  1!)17,  4f^0,  481; 
Russia  withdraws  from  the  War, 
482;  Cai)oretto,  482,  484;  liavcn; 
wrought  by  the  submarines,  484; 
the  l'nit»(l  Stales  joins  the  Allies, 
484-8;  the  submarines  checked, 
488;  general  exhauslion,  489;  f^rcat 
German  offensive,  4!)0,  491;  Allied 
ofTcnsive,  492— J;  Bulgaria  sur- 
renders, 493;  Turkey  surrenders, 
493;  Auslria-Hniigary  cullafises, 
493,  494;  (icmiany  surrenders,  495; 
settlement  following,  4!)8-527;  cost 
of  to  the  Allies,  505;  terrible  conse- 
quences of,  524-7;  cost  of,  525; 
loss  of  life  in,  525,  520;  eflecls  of  in 
Rrssia,  538,  539. 

Great  Western,  42. 

Gre<'ce,  renewed  study  of  the  Greek 
classics  in,  30;  becomes  inde- 
pendent, 117;  condition  of  in  1870, 
118;  in  the  Balkan  Wars,  327- 
31,  335;  history  of,  334-6;  in  the 
Great  War,  335,  330;  after  the 
War,  330;  conditions  in,  326; 
ancient,  370. 

Greek,  study  of,  30.320. 

Greek  Catholic  Church,  84,  8.5,  28 J; 
in  Servia,  3.'M;  in  Greece,  330;  in 
Rumania,  3.39;  in  Bulgaria,  311; 
among  the  South  Slavs,  434. 

Greek  In(lei)endence,  War  for,  313, 
31!),  .320,  321. 

Greenland,  30.3,  366. 

Grev.  Sir  Edward.  207,  401,  441. 

Griffith,  Arthur,  20.3. 

Grillparzer,  Franz,  304. 

Guadeloupe,  382. 

(Tuesde,  Jules,  535. 

Guilds,  regulations  of,  45;  disap- 
pearance of  in  England,  46. 

Gustavus  Adolphuo,  303. 

Habeas  Corpvs,  19. 

The    Hague,    peace    conferences    at, 

420,  427. 
Hague  Tribunal,  421,  442. 


568 


INDEX 


Haig,  Sir  Douglas,  490. 

Haldanc.  Lord.  !20(),  207. 

Hamburg-America  Steamship  Com- 
pany, 155. 

Ilanotaux,  400. 

Hapsburg,  House  of,  304,  308, 

Hardenberg,  125. 

Hargreavcs,  James,  45. 

Harrison,  Frederic,  122. 

Heating  of  Houses,  9,  41. 

Hebert,  87. 

Heine,  193. 

Helgoland,  374,  370,  472,  515. 

Helvetic  Republic,  3G0. 

Henry  IV',  Emperor  of  the  Holy  Ro- 
man Empire,  160. 

Henry  IV,  King  of  France,  502. 

Herzegovina,  acquired  by  Austria- 
Hungary,  178,  313,  315,  323,  324; 
rebellion  in,  321;  annexed  by 
Austria-Hungary,  324,  333,  405-8, 
435,  436;  lost  by  Austria  and 
Hungary,  510. 

Hetairia  Philike,  320. 

"High  Coiu-t  of  Parliament,"  254. 

Higher  Criticism,  88. 

Hindenburg,  von,  407,  468. 

Hindenburg  Line,  493,  494. 

Histoire  Naturclle,  70. 

Holland,  suffrage  in,  32;  in  1870,  118; 
decline  of,  211;  earlier  history  of, 
354,  355;  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury, 355-7;  relations  of  with  Great 
Britain,  350;  with  the  German  Em- 
pire, 356,  357;  during  the  Great 
War,  357;  colonial  possessions  of, 
357,  390,  391;  government  of, 
357. 

Holstein,  118,  127-9,  131,  366. 

Holy  Roman  Empire,  105,  113,  227. 

Holy  Synod  of  Russia,  281,  288. 

Home  Rule,  256. 

Home  Rule  Bill  (1886),  261;  (1893), 
261;  (1912),  261,  263. 

Honduras,  372. 

Hong  Kong,  377. 

Horsley,  Bishop,  28. 

Hours  of  Labor,  regulated  for  women 
and  children,  53;  in  the  United 
Kingdom,  98. 

House  of  Common?,  96,  254,  255. 

House  of  Lords,  253-5,  261,  412. 

Hudson  Bay,  373. 

Humanitarianism,  63. 

Ilmcb-ed  Years  War,  123,  211,  451. 

Hiingiry,  abolition  of  serfdom  in, 
2  ■>;  Revolution  of  1848  in,  27,  106; 
cjx^titution     proclaimed     in,     27; 


suffrage  in,  32,  33;  peoples  in,  108; 
becomes  a  part  of  the  Dual  Mon- 
archy, 305;  agricultural  develop- 
ment in,  306,  307;  parts  of,  310; 
government  of,  311,  312;  con- 
quered by  the  Turks,  316;  aban- 
doned by  the  Turks,  317;  fate  of, 
517,  521. 

"  Hunger  Strike,"  245. 

Huns,  16,  451. 

Hutton,  Janies,  70. 

Huxley,  T.  H.,  07,  72,  87. 

Hyndman,  H.  M.,  535. 

Iceland,  363,  366. 

Ikons,  85. 

Illiteracy,  11;  in  France,  222;  in  Ger- 
many, 222;  in  Russia,  283. 

Immaculate  Conception,  89. 

Imperialism,  392,  393,  394. 

"In  Flanders  Fields,"  450. 

Indemnity,  paid  by  France  to  Ger- 
many, 141,  211,  214;  to  be  paid  by 
Germany,  question  of,  504,  505,  515. 

Independent  Ireland,  struggle  for, 
264,  265. 

Independent  Labor  Party,  250,  536. 

India,  374,  378,  381,  394. 

Indian  Mutiny,  374. 

Industrial  Disorders,  in  France, 
411,  412;  in  Great  Britain,  412. 

Industrial  Growth,  in  the  German 
Empire,  153,  154. 

Industrial  Revolution,  contributes 
to  the  development  of  nationalism, 
36;  earlier  stages  of,  44,  45;  in  Great 
Britain,  45-53;  spreads  eastward 
across  Europe,  5^,  54;  effects  of, 
54-65;  causes  growlh  of  commun- 
istic ideas,  75;  in  France,  104; 
in  the  German  Empire,  154;  ef- 
fect of  upon  the  position  of  wo- 
men, 64,  242;  in  Russia,  291,  292; 
in  Austria-Hungary,  306. 

Industrial  Workers  of  the  World,  532. 

Industrialism,  in  Belgium,  359. 

Industry,  regulation  of  by  the  State, 
49;  unregulated,  50. 

Infallibility  of  the  Popes,  90. 

Initiative,  362. 

Intellectual  Changes  in  Modern 
Times,  67-91. 

International  Association  of  the 
Congo,  391. 

International  Engagements,  weak- 
ening of,  409. 

International  Working  Men's  Associ- 
ation, 80. 


INDEX 


5G9 


Internationale,  80. 

Ionian  Ishuuis,  I5:i.'>. 

Ireland,  condition  of  the  people  in, 
18;  nationalism  in,  37;  unite<l  with 
Great  liritain,  95,  258;  conditions 
in,  98.  99,  258,  259;  relations  of  with 
Great  Britain,  25(i-(i5;  early  his- 
tory of,  25(5,  257;  conquest  of, 
257;  famine  in,  259;  improvement 
of  conditions  in,  259,  200;  move- 
ment for  Home  Rule  in,  201,  20,'{; 
geofjraphical  relation  of  to  (Jrcat 
Britain,  204;  ravaged  by  the  Danes, 
302. 

Irish  in  the  service  of  France,  124. 

Irish  Convention,  204. 

Irish  Language,  study  of,  203. 

Irish  Literary  Revival,  203. 

Irish  (Question,  25(»-05. 

Irish  Republic,  204. 

Iron,  4.'>,  153. 

Isabella  II,  Queen  of  Spain,  350. 

Istria,  310. 

Italia  Irredenta,  S-W.  474,  500. 

Italian  Colonies,  389,  390. 

Italian  Frontier,  500. 

Itidian  Provinces,  lost  by  Austria, 
308. 

Italian  Somaliland,  389. 

Italians,  in  Austria-IIunparj',  310; 
join  the  Allies  in  the  Great  War, 
474;  progrcFS  of,  477;  defeated  at 
Caporctto,  484;  overwhelm  the 
Austrians,  493,  494. 

Italy,  disap{)caraiKe  of  serfdom  in,  25; 
suffrage  in,  3^2;  uniCicalion  of,  3(), 
114,  344,  345;  Industrial  Revolu- 
tion in,  54;  in  earlier  times,  112, 113; 
in  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  113,  114;  makes  an  alli- 
ance with  Prussia,  129;  becomes  a 
member  of  the  Triple  Alliance,  179- 
82;  relations  of  with  France,  180, 
181,  197;  amljilioiis  of  in  Tunisia, 
181;  weak  frontier  of,  181;  less  at- 
tached to  the  Triple  Alliance,  182, 
184;  makes  a  "reinsurance  treaty" 
with  France,  184;  relation  of  with 
other  meml)ers  of  the  Triple  Alli- 
ance, 197;  seizes  Tiipoli,  324,  325; 
government  of,  345;  Church  and 
State  in,  .'5-15,  340;  domestic  history 
of,  340-8;  nationalism  in,  348,  349; 
foreign  relations  of.  .'M!),  350;  rela- 
tions of  with  Austria-Hungary, 
349;  enters  the  (^reat  War,  'J.'A), 
474;  refuses  to  join  in  attack  on 
Servia  in  1913,  418;  in  1920,  519. 


Jacobins,  23,  74. 

Jamaica,  .372. 

Janina.  319,  327,  .'528. 

Janis.saries,  310,  317. 

Japan,  progress  of,  293;  fears  Ru.'sia. 
294;  at  war  with  Ru.ssia,  294-7; 
triumi)h  of,  297,  298;  increase  of 
I)i)I)ulation  in,  .348;  commanding 
po>iti()ii  of  in  the  Far  Fast,  428; 
in  1920,  523. 

Jauris,  Jean,  535. 

Java,  .391. 

Jena,  124. 

Jesuits,  159. 

Jesus,  73,  74. 

Jewish  Pale,  288. 

Jews,  in  Russia,  280,  288. 

Joffrc,  401. 

Judicial  System  in  Russia,  reformefl, 
273. 

Jugo-Slavs,  in  .■\ustria-ITungary,  300; 
aims  of  conflict  with  Italy's  <le- 
sires,  500;  question  of,  510,  511; 
in  1920,  519,  522;  sec  South  Slavs. 

Junkers.  145,  140,  152,  520. 

Jury,  Trial  by,  introduced  into  Rus- 
sia, 273. 

Justices  of  the  Peace,  273. 

Jutland,  Rattle  of.  473. 

Kaiser,  of  the  German  Empire,  1  t.l, 

148. 
Kamernn,  SSG. 
Kapilal,  Das,  80. 
Kara  George,  .332,  .333. 
Karageorgevich,  House  of,  333. 
Kay,  John,  45. 
Kepler,  09. 
Kerensky,  540,  542. 
Kiao-chau,  294,  472. 
Kiel  Canal,  300,  472,  515. 
Kiev,  541,544. 
Kingdom     of     Hungary,     310;      see 

Hungary. 
Kingdom  of  Italy,  32,  112,  114.  345; 

sec  Italy. 
Kipling,  Rudyard,  309. 
Kirk-Kilisse,  328. 
Kitchener,  General,  370. 
Klu(  k,  (ieneral  von,  4(!1. 
Kolchak,  Admiral,  5  !-4,  545. 
Koniggriitz.  Battle  of,  130. 
Korea,  294,  297. 
Koweit,  195. 

Krir(jshrau<h  im  Landhricge,  427, 
KuliurkampJ,  159,  170. 
Kumanovo,  327. 


570 


INDEX 


Labor  Disputes  in  Great  Britain,  251. 

Labor  in  Great  Britain  during  the 
Great  War,  251. 

Labor  Laws  in  the  United  Kingdom, 
98. 

Labor  Party  in  Great  Britain,  250, 
251, 

Laissez-faire,  doctrine  of,  49,  50; 
partly  abandoned,  52,  SS;  abandoned 
in  the  German  Empire,  155. 

Lamps,  44. 

Land,  in  France,  divided  among  small 
proprietors,  21,  231;  in  Russia, 
231;  ow-nership  of  in  Great  Britain, 
252,  253;  ownership  of  in  Ireland, 
257,  200;  in  Italy,  347;  in  Norway, 
364;  in  Russia  in  1920,  5iG. 

Land  Captains,  282. 

Land  Laws,  affecting  Ireland,  260, 
334. 

Land  Purchase  Acts  (Ireland),  334. 

Landlords,  English,  in  Ireland,  257. 

Landsturm,  125. 

Landtag  of  Prussia,  126. 

Landuehr,  125. 

Language  of  Command,  in  the  army 
of  Austria-Hungary,  307. 

Laon,  476,  481,  493. 

Laplace,  71. 

Lapps,  285. 

Lassalle,  Ferdinand,  530,  533. 

Law  of  Associations,  228. 

Law  of  Papal  Guarantees,  345. 

"League  of  Nations,"  502,  512-14. 

Legitimists  in  France,  217. 

Leisure,  64,  65. 

Lenine,  Nicolai,  504,  537,  542,  543, 
544,  545. 

Lens,  514. 

Leopold  II,  King  of  the  Belgians,  391, 
392. 

Leopold,  Prince,  of  Hohenzollern, 
133. 

Lepanto,  116,  316. 

Lesseps,  Ferdinand  de,  374,  375. 

Ijcvellers,  74. 

Liao-tung  Peninsula,  294,  296,  297. 

Liao-yang,  296. 

Libera  Chiesa  in  Stato  Libera,  345. 

Lilieral  Party,  advocates  Home  Rule 
for  Ireland,  261. 

Lilierals  in  Great  Britain,  248. 

Lil)eria,  371,  515. 

Liberie,  Eyalite,  Fraterniie,  27. 

Liebknecht,  Wilhelm,  533. 

Li»'ge,  459,  460. 

"  Light  Year,"  69. 

Lighting,  Artificial,  41,  43,  44. 


Liliencron,  song  of,  122. 

Limitation  of  Armaments,  opposed 
by  the  German  Empire,  206. 

Liquid  Fire,  482. 

Lithuania,  276,  285. 

Little  Russians,  in  Austria-Hungary, 
310,311. 

Liverpool,  13,  412,  533. 

Livingstone,  391. 

Livonia,  286. 

Local  Government,  reformed  in  Rus- 
sia, 112,  273;  in  France,  215,  221; 
in  England,  220,  221. 

Lombardy,  114. 

London  Protocol,  128. 

Lorraine,  136. 

"Lost  Provinces,"  431. 

Louis  XIV,  King  of  France,  95,  124, 
211,  354,  424,  506. 

Louis  XV,  King  of  France,  506. 

Louis  XVI,  King  of  France,  20, 23,  290. 

Louis  Napoleon,  26. 

Louvain,  485. 

Lowe,  Robert,  247. 

Lower  Austria,  310. 

Lucretius,  70. 

Luderitz,  386. 

Lule-Burgas,  328. 

Lusitania,  479. 

Luther,  80,  90. 

Lutheran  Church,  90,  226,  363. 

Luxemburg,  118,  132,  446. 

Lvov,  Prince,  540,  542. 

Lyell,  Sir  Charies,  71,  87?. 

Macaulay,  on  the  suffrage,  31. 

Macedonia,  325,  326,  340. 

Machinery,  Labor-saving,  44. 

Machines,  45-8. 

Mackensen,  von,  468. 

MacMahon,  136,  217. 

McCrae,  Lieut.-Col.  John,  450. 

Madagascar,  236,  384. 

Magyars,  37,  108,  109,  116,  306,  310. 

Malays  in  the  British  Empire,  380. 

Malta,  374. 

Manchuria,  294,  297,  298. 

Manhood  Suffrage,  in  France,  21, 
30,  31;  obstacles  to,  30,  31;  in 
Spain,  32;  in  Austria,  32;  in  the 
United  States,  33;  in  Norway,  365. 

Manifeste  des  Egaux,  75. 

Manifesto  of  the  Communist  Party,  56, 
GO,  79,  80,  82,  529. 

Manoel  II,  King  of  Portugal,  353. 

Manorial  Obligations,  abolished  in 
France,  21,  23;  abolished  in  Russia, 
112;  in  Rumania,  338. 


INDEX 


571 


Manorial  Rights,  in  Franco,  10. 

ManufartuririK  l)cforc  the  Industrial 
Rovolutiori,  J). 

Marat,   22. 

March  I^ws,  S.3. 

Marchand,  Major,  381. 

JNIarw-hal,  Sylvain,  75. 

Maria  Christina,  Queen  Mother,  rnles 
Spain,  350. 

Marne,  Battle  of  the,  1.34,  401-3; 
Secondlkittleof  the,  491. 

Marscilla  isc,  1  (ii). 

Martinique,  382. 

Marx,  Karl,  10;  on  tlie  hnnrgcoisir, 
56;  on  Capital  and  Lal)()r,  (17; 
career  of,  71)-8r,  doctrines  of,  Kl-4; 
influence  of,  52i),  530;  opjjosed  to  an- 
archism, 531;  in  England,  535. 

Matches,  Friction,  44. 

Maximilian,  Arclidukc  of  Austria,  308. 

Mazurian  Lakes,  4(57. 

Mazzini,  114. 

Mechanical  Invention,  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  10. 

^Mediterranean  Sea,  12,  14;  agreement 
coneerning,  183,  2(17;  trade-route 
through,  196;  Turkish  i)ower  in, 
316;  controlled  by  the  British,  375, 
429;  havoc  WTOUght  by  submarines 
in,  484. 

Mehemet  Ali,  320,  321. 

Menshcviki,  540. 

Mercenaries,  123,  124;  Swiss,  3G0. 

Merchant  Ships,  sunk  by  submarines, 
479. 

Mesopotamia,  435. 

Messines  Ridge,  480. 

Metternich,  Prince,  24,  25,  106,  320, 
335. 

Metz,  136,  137,  138,  493. 

Mexico,  308,  383. 

Middle  Europe,  435,  436. 

Militarism,  in  Prussia.  167.  168; 
growth  of  in  Europe,  190;  in  Eurojie, 
424-6;  in  antiquity,  424;  in  the 
German  Empire,  438. 

Military  Convention  between  Russia 
and  France,  235. 

Military  Law  of  Boycn  (1813),  125, 
424. 

Military  Power  Altered  by  the  In- 
dustrial Revolution,  59,  60. 

Military  Strategy,  127. 

Miliukov,  IVofessor,  300,  540,  542. 

Mill,  J.  S.,  63,  231,  243. 

Milton,  John,  17,  68,  240. 

"Ministries"  in  Austria-Hungary, 
305. 


Ministry,  in  the  I'nilcd  Kingdom,  97; 
in  Prussia,  97;  in  J'ranic,  97,  104. 

Mir,  272,  301. 

Mischoz,  332. 

MitraUUu.se,  1.34. 

MHldeuropu,  195,  100. 

Mobilization,  444. 

Mohammedans  in  the  Briti.sb  Empire, 
380. 

Moldavia,  sec  Danubian  I'rincipali- 
li(  .1. 

Moltke,  Ilellmuth  von,  126,  127,  128, 
130,  133,  135,  130;  on  peace  and 
war,  43H. 

Monarchy,  relics  of  cherished  in  (ireat 
liritain,  224;  restoration  of  dc-ircd 
in  Frame,  224. 

Mona.steries,  suppression  of  in  Po- 
land, 27(). 

Mongols,  31(;. 

Monroe  Doctrine,  434. 

Mons,  460. 

Montalembert,  17. 

Montdidier,  492. 

Montenegro,  declares  war  on  Tur- 
key, 327;  in  the  Balkan  Wars,  327- 
31;  history  of,  332;  ccjndilions  in, 
332;  in  the  Balkan  Cris-is  of  1912-13, 
417;  expected  to  join  a  South  Slavic 
fe<leration,  510. 

Monte  Santo,  483-4. 

Montesquieu,  20,  74,  117. 

Moravia,  310,  507. 

More,  Sir  Thomas,  74. 

Morocco,  acquired  by  France,  384, 
415;  jjenetration  of  by  the  French, 
411;  German  rights  in,  515;  ri^^hts 
of  Austria  in,  517. 

aiorocco  Crisis  of  1905,  402,  403. 

Morocco  Crisis  of  1911,  411-16. 

Morris,  William,  535. 

Moscow,  15,  235,  292,  542. 

INIountains  of  Europe,  13. 

Mozanibifiue,  390. 

Mukden,  Battle  of,  296,  402. 

Munici|)al  Government  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  151,  152. 

Namur,  458,  459. 

Napoleon,  14,  21;  rise  of,  22;  work  of, 
23;  hostility  to,  24;  wars  of,  24, 
35,  30,  95,  213;  French  Revolution 
saved  by,  24;  on  aristocracy,  55; 
relations  of  with  the  Church,  85-7, 
227;  power  of,  102;  rearranges  cen- 
tral Europe,  105;  invasion  of  Rus- 
sia by, 235. 

Napoleon    III,    Emperor   of   France, 


572 


INDEX 


26,  94.;  foreign  policy  cf,  103,  104; 
waniug  popularity  of  the  govern- 
ment of,  131;  diplomacy  of  before 
the  Franco-German  War,  131-3; 
in  the  war,  13C),  137;  maintains  the 
temporal  power  of  the  Pope,  180, 
181,  345;  leader  in  the  Crimean 
War,  235;  assists  the  Rumanians  to 
unite  the  Danubian  Principalities, 
337;  assists  the  Italians,  344; 
intrigues  of  concerning  Belgium,  359. 

Napoleonic  Empire,  lO'i. 

Natal,  376. 

Nation,  original  meaning  of  the  word, 
34. 

National  Armies,  124,  125. 

National  Assembly,  in  France  (1789), 
20;  of  Russia,  299. 

National  Convention  (France,  1792), 
21. 

National  Council  (Swiss),  361. 

National  Debt  of  France,  223,  525. 

National  Debts,  524,  525. 

National  Guard  in  Paris,  212. 

National  Insurance  Act,  249. 

"National  Notables,"  31. 

National  Wealth,  of  the  principal 
European  countries,  156,  157;  of 
France,  230. 

National  Workshops,  77,  73. 

Nationalism,  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, 8;  in  the  nineteenth  century, 
9;  in  France  during  the  French 
Revolution,  22;  development  of, 
34-7;  disintegrating  effects  of, 
37;  in  Central  Europe,  106;  among 
the  Poles  of  the  German  Empire, 
170;  strength  of  in  Russia,  289; 
in  the  German  Empire,  289;  in 
Italy,  348;  in  Holland,  356. 

Nationality,  34-7. 

"Natural  Laws,"  50. 

"Naval  Holidav,"  206. 

Naval  Laws  (German),  200,  201,  400. 

Naval  Panic  of  1909,  203,  204. 

Naval  Power,  reliance  of  Great  Bri- 
tain on,  199,  200;  development  of 
in  the  German  Empire,  £00,  201. 

Navarino,  321. 

Near  East,  324. 

Nebular  Hypothesis,  71. 

Needle  Gun,  130. 

Negroes  in  the  British  Empire,  380. 

Nekrasov,  269. 

Nepal,  379. 

Neptune,  69. 

Netherlands,  in  earlier  times,  354,  355; 
revolt  of,  354,  358. 


Netherlands,  Austrian,  355,  358; 
Dutch,  355;  Spanish,  355. 

Neubreisach,  458. 

Neutrality  of  Belgium  and  of  Lux- 
emburg violated  by  the  German 
Empire,  446. 

Neutralization  of  Belgium,  359;  of 
Switzerland,  360;  of  Norway,  365. 

Neuve  Chapclle,  475. 

New  Brunswick,  373. 

New  England,  29. 

New  Guinea,  391. 

New  Lanark,  76. 

New  South  Wales,  373. 

New  Zealand,  380. 

Newcomen,  Thomas,  42. 

Newfoundland,  372. 

Ncw.«papers,  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, 9;  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tiu"y,  11. 

Nicholas  I,  Tsar  of  Russia,  24,  111. 

Nicholas  IL  Tsar  of  Russia,  269; 
character  and  policy  of,  290-1; 
reign  of,  290-302;  urges  disarma- 
ment, 426;  works  for  world  peace, 
502;  abdication  of,  539;  murder  of, 
544. 

Nihilists,  279,  283. 

"No  Annexations  and  No  Indemni- 
ties," 504,  541. 

Nobles,  in  the  eighteenth  centiu-y,  8; 
in  the  nineteenth  century,  9;  eman- 
cipation of  serfs  by  in  Russia, 
270. 

Non  Erpedit,  346. 

Non  Licet,  346. 

Norddeutsche  AUgemeine  Zeitung^  398. 

Normandy,  363. 

Normans,  15,  256. 

North  German  Confederation,  27,  32, 
96,  107,  131,  134-6. 

North  German  Lloyd  Steamship 
Company,  155. 

North  Sea,  13,  354,  428. 

Norway,  118,  362,  363,  364,  365. 

Nova  Scotia,  373. 

Novi-Bazar,  Sanjak  of,  334. 

Obrenovich,  Milosh,  332. 
Obrenovich  Family,  333. 
October  Manifesto,  299,  300. 
"Octobrists,"  300. 
Officers,  in  war,  452. 
Oil,  used  for  lighting,  44. 
Old  Age  Insiu-ance  Laws,  163. 
Old  Age  Pension  Act,  249. 
Old  Catholics,  159. 
Old  Colonial  System,  393. 


INDEX 


573 


Old  Rcgiqie,  41. 

Ollivicr,  Emilc,  165. 

Orndurman,  37G. 

Ontario,  .'573. 

"OjK'n  Covenants,"  .^Ol. 

Opium  Traffic,  377,  378. 

"Opium  War,"  377. 

Oran^;e  I'Vot-  Stale,  37G. 

"Organic  Law.s,"  !il7. 

Oryanixatioti  du  Travail,  77. 

Origin  of  Species,  71. 

Orlamio,  .'501. 

Orleans,  House  of,  217. 

Orleans  Monareiiy,  '3Hi. 

Ortfiodox  Church,  84,  85,  284,  285, 
288,  289. 

Osman  Pasha,  .S23. 

Ottoman  lOmiiire,  in  earlier  times, 
lie,  117;  in  the  first  half  of  tlie 
nineteenth  century,  117,  118;  decay 
of,  314;  decline  of,  310,  317;  gov- 
ernment of,  31  7. 

Owen,  Roherl,  7(!,  78,  79,  635. 

Oxford,  247- 

Pacstum,  15. 

Pan-Germanism,  289. 

Pan-Slavism,  289,  419. 

Panama,  10,  375. 

Pankfuirst,  Emmclinc,  245. 

Papacv,  227. 

Paparinfallibility,  07,  90,  159. 

Papal  States,  85. 

Paradise  Lest,  08. 

Paris,  siege  of,  1S8;  surrender  of, 
139;  in  1871,  212,  213;  socialist 
commune  in,  212-14;  industrial 
disorders  in,  533. 

Parliament  of  Great  Britain,  19,  32, 
250. 

Parliament,  Independent,  in  Ireland, 
258. 

I'arliament  Aet  of  1911,  25.3,  255,  2G1. 

Parliamentary  Pcprcsentation  in 
Great  Britain,  241. 

Parncll,  C.  S.,  201. 

Partitions  of  Poland,  270. 

Patriotism,  393. 

Peace  Conferences,  426,  427. 

Peace  of  Paris,  373. 

Peasant  Proprietors  in  France,  23. 

Peasants,  in  France,  condition  of 
bettered,  22;  purcliase  lan<l  in 
I'Vance,  75,  231;  in  Russia,  condi- 
tion of.  Ill,  272,  273,  291;  become 
landowners  in  Russia,  231;  condi- 
tion of  in  Ireland,  258,  259;  acquire 
ownership  of  land  in  Ireland,  200; 


condition  of  in  Poland,  278;  owner- 
ship of  land  b\'  in  Ser\ia,  3.'i4. 

Peojilc,  Lower  Class  of,  condition  ot 
in  the  Old  Itcginic.  8,  17. 

Pcrouiic,  47(i,  477. 

Persia,  370,  378,  379,  405. 

Petrograd.  5.38,  539. 

Philip  11,  Kingof  .Si)ain,  358. 

Philii)pine  Islands,  ."90. 

Piedmont,  sulfrage  in,  .32;  leader  of 
the  Italian  peoi>le,  114. 

Pira'Us,  .'!.'i5. 

Pitt.  \Niliiam.  the  Younger,  258. 

Pius  \ll.  Pojie,  220. 

Pius  IX,  Pope,  89,  345,  3^16. 

Plagues,  43. 

Plato,  73. 

Plehve,  von,  283,  290,  298. 

Plcvii.i,  323. 

Pobie(!ono.stsev,2C9, 281,  282, 290,  299. 

I'oison  (ia.ses,  427. 

Poland,  partitions  of,  110;  reWlion  of 
18015  in,  274;  de.-ire  for  independ- 
ence in,  270;  cf)mi)lete  subjection 
of,  270;  conditions  in,  278;  former 
greatness  of,  285;  strategical  posi- 
tion of  in  Russia,  287;  attempted 
Russificationof,  288;tributary  to  the 
Turks,  310;  leading  Slavic  state, 
433;  battles  in,  40,S,  409;  German 
methods  in,  485;  question  of,  508; 
in  1920,  521.  522;  lost  to  Russia,  543; 
at  war  wilh  the  l>cl.yk(riln,  544. 

Poles,  in  the  (jerman  Knii)ire,  170, 
171;  of  Russia,  280;  disturbances 
among,  298;  concessions  to,  299; 
in  Austria-Hungary,  310,  311. 

"Polish  Corridor,"  514. 

Polish  Language,  170. 

Polish  Nationalism,  170. 

Polish  Rebellion  of  1803,  179. 

Popes,  85,  180,  181. 

Population,  increase  of  in  Europe, 
50;  in  Great  Britain,  50,  57,  430; 
in  the  Gernuin  Eiiij)ire,  57,  58,  157, 
158,  4.30;  decline  of  in  Ireland,  99, 
430;  growth  of  in  the  principal 
Euro])ean  countries,  157;  increase 
of  in  Italy,  348;  in  Japan,  SIS; 
room  for  growth  of,  429,  430; 
gnjwf  h  of  in  France,  430. 

Port  Arthur,  294,  2!)(i,  297. 

Portugal,  i)alaces  of,  14;  history  of  in 
the  nineteenth  century,  352-4; 
controls  the  sea-routes  to  the  east, 
372;  colonies  of,  390. 

Portuguese  Colonies,  alleged  secret 
agreement  about,  353,  587,  888. 


574 


INDEX 


Portuguese  East  Africa,  387,  390. 

Portuguese  Republic,  353,  354. 

Posen,  170,  284.  287,  514. 

Potsdam  Accord,  409,  412. 

Poverty  in  Great  Britain,  252. 

Prince  Edward  Island,  373. 

Principles  of  Geology,  71. 

Printing-press,  Power,  11. 

"  Prisoners  of  the^Vatican,"  346. 

Production,  increased,  11. 

I'rofit-sharing,  76. 

Proletariat,  81,  82. 

Protective  Tariffs,  in  the  German 
Empire,  154,  155;  in  Austria- 
Hungary,  307. 

Protestant  Churches,  90;  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  91. 

Proudhon,  Pierre  Joseph,  279,  280, 
530,  531. 

Prussia,  education  in,  11;  reforms  in, 
25;  abolition  of  serfdom  in,  25; 
Revolution  of  1848  in,  27,  106; 
constitution  granted  in,  27;  nation- 
alism in,  36;  leader  of  the  German 
states,  107;  military  triumphs  of, 
122-41;  foundation  of  the  greatness 
of,  124;  development  of  the  army  of, 
124-6;  at  war  with  Denmark,  127-9; 
with  Austria,  129-31;  with  France, 
131-41;  makes  alliance  with  Italy, 
129;  army  of  in  the  Austro-Prussian 
War,  131;  army  of  in  the  Franco- 
German  ^Yar,  135,  136;  govern- 
m-ent  in,  167;  friendship  of  with 
Russia,  178,  179;  beginning  of,  193, 
433;  development  of  the  army  of, 
424,  425. 

Prussian  Army,  development  of,  424, 
425. 

Prussian  Guard,  462. 

"Public  Schools,"  247. 

Punch,  188. 

Puritan  Revolution,  242. 

Pyrenees  Mountains,  12,  13. 

Quakers,  242. 

Quanta  Cura,  89. 

Quebec,  373. 

Quest-ce  que  la  Propri6tef,  530. 

Racial  Differences  in  European  Coun- 
tries, 284. 

Racial  Superiority,  belief  in,  437. 

Itacial  Unity,  desire  for,  283,  284. 

Radicalism,  in  France,  104,  105; 
in  Russia,  278,  279. 

Railroads,  11,41,291,454. 

Reason,  Worship  of  in  France,  22,  86. 


"Red  Sunday,"  299. 

Redistribution  Act  of  1885,  241. 

Redmond,  John,  261. 

Referendum,  362. 

Reflections  of  Pobiedonostsev,  281. 

Reformation,  62,  158. 

Reich.statid,  145,  169. 

Reichsrath,  310,  311. 

Reichstag,  145. 

Reign  of  Terror,  22,  24,  86. 

"Reinsurance  Treaty,"  186,  192. 

Religion,  troubled  by  the  doctrine 
of  evolution,  72,  73;  in  France,  227, 
228,  230. 

Religious  Belief,  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  8;  conBict  of  with  scien- 
tific thought,  10. 

Religious  Liberty  in  the  Turkish  Em- 
pire, 317. 

Religious  Orders  in  France,  228. 

Re-port  of  the  British  Labor  Com- 
mittee, 251. 

Representation  of  Industries  and 
Groups,  246,  247. 

Representative  Government,  origin 
and  development  of,  29. 

Republic,  established  in  France,  21; 
becomes  militant,  24;  in  England, 
28;  second,  established  in  France, 
103,  219,  220;  third,  212;  in  Spain, 
350;  in  Portugal,  353,  354. 

Republic  of  Plato,  73. 

"Revenge  for  Sadowa,"  132. 

Reventlow,  Count  Ernst  zu,  240. 

Revolution  cf  1830,  24. 

Revolution  of  1848,  25,  77,  106,  109, 
301. 

Revolution  of  1005  in  Russia,  298- 
300. 

Revolution  of  1917  in  Russia,  231; 
beginning  of,  539;  first  stage  of,  540; 
second  stage  of,  542-0;  results  of,  546. 

Revolutionary  War,  100. 

Rhcims,  15,  486,  491. 

Rhodes,  Cecil,  377. 

Rigsdag,  366. 

Risorgimento,  114. 

Rivet  Law,  215. 

Robespierre,  22,  74,  545. 

Roman  Catholic  Church,  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  85-90;  in  the  Ger- 
man Empire,  159,  170;  in  France, 
220-30;  in  Poland,  286;  in  Italy, 
345,  340. 

Roman  Catholics,  religious  disabili- 
ties removed  from,  31,  98;  in  Ire- 
land, 99;  in  the  German  Empire, 
159,  160. 


INDEX 


btb 


Roman  Empire.  ?A.  fi2,  232,  370,  871. 

Romanovs,  Dynasty  of,  eii<l  of,  5'M. 

Rome,  111,  115,  3H,  315,  370. 

Roon,  von,  12(5. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  297. 

Roiissejiu,  8.  20,  28,  2!),  lO,  71.  80. 

Rudolph,  Archduke,  of  Au.stria,  308. 

Rigby.  247. 

Rumania,  wins  autonomy,  117;  eon- 
«htions  in  in  1870,  118;  attaelied 
to  the  Triple  Alliance.  184.  314; 
enters  the  Second  Balkan  AVar. 
331,  3.'?7;  iiistory  of.  33(1-8;  <lomes- 
lic  affairs  of,  338,  339;  enters  the 
(ireal  War,  478;  conquered,  478;  in 
1920,  521. 

Rumanians,  union  of  assisted  by 
Napoleon  111,  103;  in  Hungary, 
300;  in  .\u.stria-IIungary,  310,  314. 

Rumelia,  319. 

Rural  Life,  [)redoniinanee  of  before 
the  Industrial  Revolution,  (iO. 

Russia,  little  aifccted  by  the  French 
Revolution.  25;  nationali.sm  in,  3(>; 
Industrial  Revolution  in.  54,  291, 
292;  religion  of.  84,  85;  earlier 
history  of,  109,  110;  in  the  nine- 
teenth century.  110,  111;  govern- 
ment of.  111,  112;  reforms  in,  112; 
rivalry  of  with  Austria-Hungary. 
175.  17(5.  178;  friend.>hip  of  with 
Prussia.  179;  new  agreement  of 
with  the  Central  Powers.  185,  18(5; 
secret  treaty  of  with  the  Cerman 
Empire,  180;  attitude  of  in  the 
Affair  of  1875,  234;  makes  the  Dual 
Alliance  with  France,  235;  rela- 
tions of  with  Great  Britain,  205, 
404;  under  Alexander  H.  209-281; 
aboHtion  of  serfdom  in.  270-4; 
reform  of  the  judicial  system  in, 
273;  reform  of  local  government 
in.  273,  274;  discontent  in,  274; 
tru.shes  the  Polish  rebellion,  27G; 
increase  of  discontent  in,  278;  nihil- 
ism in,  279;  anarchi.sts  in.  279. 
280;  activities  of  radicals  in,  280. 
281;  under  Alexander  HI,  281-90; 
reaction  in.  282,  283;  polic-v  of  Rus- 
sification  in.  283,  284,  287.  288, 
289;  peoples  in.  284-7;  unification 
of  peoples  in  desired,  287;  extreme 
nationalism  in.  289;  corruption 
and  inefficiency  of  the  government 
in,  289,  290;  imder  Nic-holas  H, 
290-302;  foreign  relations  of,  292-4; 
at  war  with  Japan,  294-8;  accepts 
the    Treaty    of    Portsmouth,    297, 


298;  discontent  in,  298;  revolution 
in,  298-.'{00;  reaction  in,  299-3(Jl; 
U-fore  the  (Jrcat  War,  .302;  foreign 
pcjlicy  of,  302;  relations  of  \Nith 
Austria-Hungary,  313;  thwarted 
at  the  Congress  of  licrlin,  313; 
f;oulhfrn  jjart  cjf  conciuerecl  by  the 
Turks,  310;  expansion  of  at  the 
t'X|)ense  of  the  Turks,  818;  assists 
the  (ireeks  to  win  incUi)endence, 
321;  makes  war  on  Turkey.  35^3; 
obtains  a  si)here  of  influence  in 
Persia.  379;  in  the  IJosiiia-Herzego- 
vina;Crisis,  400-8;  recovers  strength. 
410;iFi  the  Balkan  Crisis  cjf  1912-13. 
410.  417;  outlets  of,  428;  leader  of 
the  Slavs,  433;  negotiations  of  with 
Germany,  443;  cc)llaj)se  of  in  the 
Great  War,  481,  482;  losses  of,  521, 
522;  socialism  in,  5.37-40;  effects 
of  the  Great  War  in,  5.38,  539;  under 
the  HoJ.shcviki,  542-0;  accei)ts  the 
Peace  of  Brest-Litovsk.  542,  543. 

Russian  P>mpire,  end  of,  521,  522. 

Russian  Revolution  of  1905,  298-300; 
failure  of,  301. 

Russian  Revolution  of  1917,  231, 
482,  .522;  cause  of,  53t>-4C;  results 
of,  54G. 

Russians,  defeat  the  Au.strians,  4G7; 
overrim  (ialicia,  4(i7;  defeated  at 
Tannenbcrg.  407;  cajjture  Przem- 
ysl.  408;  strive  to  win  the  Car- 
pathian passes.  408;  defeated  dis- 
astrously at  the  Dunajec-,  408;  re- 
treat of,  408.  4(;9;  last  offensive  of, 
477;  withdraw  from  the  War,  481, 
482;  endurance  of,  482. 

Russificatinn  of  Poland,  attempted. 
278;  policy  of.  283.  284,  287-JK). 

Russo-Japanese  War,  lessons  of,  202, 
203;  course  of,  294-8;  consequences 
of  in  Europe,  402,  404;  in  Asia,  434. 

Russo-Turkish  War,  178,  205,  313. 
323,  339,  404. 

Ruthenians,  in  Austria-Hungary,  310, 
311. 

Saar  Basin,  514. 
Sabotage,  412,  5r.3. 
Sagasta,  351. 
Sahara,  383,  381. 
St.  Mihiel,  493. 
St.  Petersburg.  292.  299. 
St.Qnentin,  47(!.  490. 
Saint-Simon,  10,  70,  77. 
Sakhalin.  297. 
Salisbury,  Ix)rd,  19.3,  400, 


576 


INDEX 


Salonica,  198,  312;  captured  by  the 
Greeks,  3i7,  335;  occupied  by  the 
Allies,  336,  472,  493. 

Sabburg,  15,  310. 

Samoan  Islands,  386. 

Sarajevo,  308,  315,  440. 

Sardinia,  Kingdom  of,  114,  344. 

Scandinavian  Countries,  in  1870,  118; 
earlier  history  of,  SGi,  363;  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  363-6. 

Scharnhorst,  125. 

Schiller,  450. 

Schleswig,  118,  127-9,  131,  284,  366. 

Schleswig-Holstein,  question  of,  127, 
128;  war  about,  128,  129. 

Schnjebele  Affair,  234,  235. 

Science,  conflict  of  with  religion, 
87,  88,  91. 

ScientiBc  Progress,  10,  87,  88. 

Scotland,  58,  95. 

"Scrap  of  Paper,"  189,  409,  446. 

Scutari,  327,  328,  329,  417. 

Second  Balkan  War,  315,  329,  331. 

Second  Empire  (French),  96,  103,  383. 

Second  Hague  Conference,  200,  427. 

Secret  German  Report,  alleged,  on 
German  expansion,  398. 

Sedan,  137. 

Self-government,  progress  of  in  Eu- 
rope, 20-4,  25-33;  advanced  by 
the  Industrial  Revolution,  60,  61; 
development  of  in  France,  219,  220; 
in  the  British  Empire,  381. 

Senate  of  the  United  States,  256,  518. 

Serbs,  in  Austria-Hungary,  310;  help 
to  defeat  the  Bidgars,  493. 

"Serbs,  Croats,  and  Slovenes,"  State 
of,  516,  521,  522. 

Serfdom,  8.  17,  18,  19;  abolished  in 
France,  20,  23,  271;  disappearance 
of  in  the  various  countries  of  Eu- 
rope, 23;  abolition  of  in  Russia, 
112,  270,  271;  disappearance  of  in 
England,  271;  results  of  the  aboli- 
tion of  in  Russia,  272,  273;  end  of 
in  Europe,  271;  end  of  in  Rumania, 
338. 

Sergei,  Grand  Duke,  298. 

Servia,  relations  of  with  Austria- 
Hungary,  315;  with  Russia,  315; 
beginning  of  the  struggle  for  the 
independence  of,  319;  in  the  Balkan 
Wars,  327-31,  333,  334;  history  of, 
332,  333;  foreign  relations  of,  333, 
334;  in  the  Great  War,  334;  after 
the  War,  334,  510;  conditions  in, 
334;  in  the  Bosnia-Herzegovina 
Crisis,  407,  408;  strives  for  an  out- 


let on  the  Adriatic,  416;  appeals 
to  Russia  for  support,  441;  accused 
of  complicity  in  the  crime  of  Sara- 
jevo, 440;  largely  yields  to  the  Aus- 
trian demands,  442;  conquered  by 
the  Teutonic  Powers,  469,  470;  Ger- 
man methods  in,  485. 

Seven  Years  War,  373,  382. 

Shantung,  515. 

Shaw,  G.  B.,  536. 

Shelley,  304. 

"Shining  Armor,"  408. 

Siam,  515,  517. 

Siberia,  280,  293,  298. 

Sickness  Insurance  Law,  163. 

Sinn  Fein,  37,  203,  264,  265. 

Sk-upshtina,  334. 

Slavery,  in  the  United  States,  25,  271; 
in  Brazil,  25,  271. 

Slavonia,  510. 

Slavs,  in  Austria-Hungary,  306;  in 
Greece  in  the  Middle  Ages,  336; 
rivalry  of  with  the  Teutons,  433-6; 
position  of  in  1920,  522. 

Slivnitsa,  333,  340. 

Slovaks,  311,  507. 

Slovenes,  310. 

Smith,  Adam,  49. 

Sobranje,  341. 

Social  Democratic  Federation,  535. 

Social  Democratic  Party  (German 
Empire),  166. 

Social  Democratic  Party  (Russia), 
292,  533,  534,  540. 

"Social  Workshops,"  77. 

Socialism,  10;  origin  of,  73;  develop- 
ment of,  73-81;  doctrines  of,  81-4; 
effects  of  upon  the  Church,  87; 
condemned  by  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Chiu-ch,  89;  in  France,  104, 
105;  gro^vth  of  in  the  German  Em- 
pire, 161,  162;  repression  of,  162; 
in  Great  Britain,  251;  in  Russia, 
292;  spread  of,  529,  530;  discon- 
tent with  the  progress  of,  531; 
spread  of  in  the  German  Empire, 
533,  534;  in  Austria-Hungary,  534; 
in  France,  534,  535;  in  Great  Bri- 
tain, 535-7;  in  Russia,  537-46. 

Socialist,  origin  of  the  term,  76. 

Socialist  Parly  in  the  German  Empire, 
163. 

Socialist  Revolutionary  Party,  292. 

Soissons,  492. 

Somme,  Battle  of  the.  476,  477. 

Sonderbund,  119,  301. 

Sorel,  Georges,  529. 

South  Africa,  357.  380. 


INDEX 


577 


South  Slavs,  310,  314,  433,  434. 

Sovki  (jovcrniricnt,  decTCCs  of,  59St. 

Soviets,  5ii,  543. 

Spain,  dihappcarancc  of  serfdom  in, 
25;  constitution  proclaimed  in,  !^(J, 
27;  suffra^^c  in,  'M;  natii)nali.sm  in, 
;{4-«;  Industrial  Revolution  in,  51; 
rules  part  of  Italy,  113;  in  earlier 
times,  115;  in  1870,  IKi;  throne  of 
vacant,  133;  relations  of  with  the 
Triple  .Alliance,  183;  decline  of,  211; 
history  of  mimv  1870.  3,")(),  351;  gov- 
ernment of,  351;  conditions  in,  352; 
colonial  empire  of  lost,  372,  31)0. 

Spanish  llepnhlic,  350. 

"Spartacides,"  520. 

Spencer,  llerliert,  72. 

•'Spheres  of  Inlluencc"  in  China,  378. 

Spichcren,  130. 

Si)ies,  130,  42(1,  455. 

Spinninji  "Jenny,"  45. 

"S[)innin;;-.Mule,"  4(i. 

"Splendid  Isolation,"  90,  175,  401. 

Stadt  holder,  355. 

Staml>ulov,  340. 

Standiird  of  Living,  230,  231. 

Standing  Armies,  425. 

Stanley,  301. 

"State  of  Nature,"  20,  30. 

State  Socialism,  102,  103,  107,  249. 

States  (Jcneral,  254,  357. 

Slatiito  Fondamcntulc  del  Regno,  345. 

Steam,  41. 

Steam  Engine,  9,  41,  42. 

Steamboat,  41,  42. 

Steamship,  10. 

Stein,  vom,  125. 

Stephenson,  George,  42. 

Slolypin,  301. 

SloTthiiui,  30t,  305. 

Straits  Settlements,  373. 

Strassburg,  138,  458. 

Strategic  Railways,  426. 

Strikes,  532. 

Stromboli,  15. 

Stvria,  310. 

Subject  Races,  108-171. 

Submarines,  10,  478-80,  484,  488,  489. 

Sudan,  376. 

Suez  Canal,  10,  11,  374,  375. 

Suffrage,  in  Europe  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  8;  universal,  17;  in  France 
in  1791,  20;  in  the  United  States. 
30;  in  France,  30,  31;  in  Great  Bri- 
tain, 30;  extension  of  in  central  and 
southern  Europe,  32,  33;  extension 
of  in  the  I'nited  Kingdom,  90; 
in  Russia,  299,  301;  in  Austria,  310, 


311;  in  Hungary,  312;  in  Italy.  3^15; 
in  Spain,  351;  in  Holland,  357;  in 
Mclgiuin,  ,359,  .300;  in  \<jrway,  3G1, 
3(i5;  in  Dcmnark,  :m),  307. 

Sutrragctlcs,  245.  24ti. 

Sumatra,  391. 

Sweden,  suffrage  in,  33;  decline  of, 
211;  in  earlier  times,  30.3;  in  the 
nineteenth  century,  301,  305;  gov- 
ernment of,  3M. 

Swedes  in  Russia,  303. 

Swedish  (nlturc  in  Finland,  285. 

Swiss,  obtain  their  freedom  from  Aus- 
tria, 300. 

Swiss  Cantons,  govcrimient  in,  18. 

Swiss  Confederation,  .3(>(). 

Switzerland,  sufTragc  in,  .33;  neutrali- 
zation of,  118;  education  in,  248; 
earlier  history  (jf,  300;  in  the  nine- 
teenth century,  300,  301;  govern- 
ment of,  301,  .3(;2:  conditions  in,  302. 

Sijlhiliiis  of  ICrrar.i,  89. 

Syndicalism,  531-3. 

Syndicat,  532. 

Tal)le  of  Magnates,  312. 

Tajf  To/cCase,  249.  250. 

Take  Your  Clioiee,  30. 

Talleyrand,  102. 

"TanJis,"    494. 

TanncnlniTg,  Ralllecf,  407. 

Taxation  in  Italy,  347. 

Tchalaldja  Line's,  328. 

Telegraph,  11,41. 

Tclc{)h()nc,  41. 

Terrorists,  281. 

Teutonic    Race,    alleged    superiority 

of,  437. 
Teutons,    rivalry   of   with   the   Slavs, 

433-6. 
Textile  Industry,  45,  46. 
"They  Shall  Not  Pass,"  470. 
Thiers,  L.  A.,  214,520. 
Third  Estate.  20. 
Third    Republic    (French),   212,    215, 

217,  224,  227,  228. 
Thirteen   Colonies,   independence  of, 

257,  373. 
Thirty  Years  War.  12.3,  153,  158,  303, 

451,  498. 
Three-class  System  of  Voting,  146,  273. 
Tibet,  378,  379,  405. 
Tirpitz,  Admiral  von,  200. 
Togo,  Admiral,  297. 
Togoland,  380. 
Tonkin,  383. 
Tovnlxe,  .\rnold,  40. 
Trade  Unions,  D'J,  98,  219,  250,  532. 


578 


INDEX 


Trades  Disputes  Act,  250. 

Trafalgar,  201. 

Tram  Cars,  10. 

Trans-Siberian  Railway,   2Q3,   294. 

Transportation,   revolution   in,   42. 

Transvaal,  376. 

Transylvania,  310,  314,  317,  337,  338, 
521. 

Travel.  9,  10. 

Treaty  of  Adrianople,  319,  321,  332, 
33G. 

Treaty  of  Berlin,  178,  323,  324,  337, 
339,  340.  405,  406. 

Treaty  of  Brest-Litovsk,  482,  515. 
517,  542,  543. 

Treaty  of  Bucharest,  331,  334,  337, 
341. 

Treaty  of  Carlowitz,  317. 

Treaty  of  Frankfort,  139-41,  153. 

Treaty  of  London,  319,  328,  335. 

Treaty  of  Portsmouth,  297,  298. 

Treaty  of  Prague,  131,  175. 

Treaty  of  St.  Germain,  338,  516,  517. 

Treaty  of  San  Stefano,  319,  323,  332, 
339. 

Treaty  of  Sevres,  517,  518. 

Treaty  of  Utrecht,  176,  254,  358. 
373. 

Treaty  of  Versailles,  512-16.  518,  519. 

Treaty  of  Vienna,  128,  129. 

"Treaty  Ports."  377. 

Treitschke,  122,  143. 

Trenlino,  310,  349,  477. 

Trevithick,  Richard,  42. 

Tribune,  New  York,  498. 

Trieste,  310,  428,  477,  506. 

Trinidad,  374. 

Triple  Alliance,  preamble  to,  173; 
formation  of,  179-82;  weakening  of, 
182;  treaties  of,  182,  183;  relations 
of  with  Great  Britain,  183,  267; 
Rumania  an  appendage  of,  184, 
314,  315;  power  of,  184,  185; 
stronger  than  the  Dual  Alliance, 
236;  Italy  helps  to  make,  349; 
position  of,  398;  power  of  rela- 
tively diminished,  417,  418;  op- 
posed to  the  Triple  Entente,  422. 

Triple  Alliance  of  Workers  in  Great 
Britain,  251. 

Triple  Entente,  205,  266;  formation 
of,  399.  404,  405;  increasing  strength 
of.  410;  opposed  to  the  Triple 
Alliance,  423. 

Tripoli,  324,  325;  seized  by  Italy, 
349,  389,  390. 

Trotzky,  301,  504,  537,  542,  543, 
64A. 


Tsardom,  fall  of  the,  539,  540. 

Tsingtao,  472, 

Tsushima,  Battle  of,  203,  297. 

Tunisia,  181,  383,  384,  389. 

Turco-Italian  War.  429. 

Turgcniev,  279. 

Turkestan.  265. 

Turkey,  relations  of  with  the  German- 
Empire,  193,  194;  former  greatness 
of.  315;  enters  the  Great  War.  470; 
surrenders  to  the  Allies,  493; 
losses  of,  517. 

Turkish  Empire,  rivalry  for  the  pos- 
sessions of,  318;  preserved  by  the 
rivalries  of  the  Great  Powers, 
318,  319;  dismemlterment  of,  319- 
31;  further  decline  and  losses  of, 
324-31;  before  the  Great  War,  331; 
African  possessions  of  lost,  390; 
loses  Bosniaand  Herzegovina,  405-8. 

Turks,  earlier  greatness  of,  315;  char- 
acter of,  325;  incapacity  of  in  gov- 
ernment, 325. 

"Two- Power  Standard,"  British  na- 
val policy,  199. 

Uganda,  376. 

Ukraine,  284,  287,  522,  543. 

Ulster,  99,  257,  263. 

Unification,  of  Germany,  106,  107; 
of  Italy,  114,  115. 

Unionists,  of  Ulster,  264. 

United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland,  suffrage  in,  31,  32; 
in  1870,  94;  formation  of,  95,  258; 
national  debt  of,  96,  525;  govern- 
ment of,  96,  97;  extension  of  the 
franchise  in,  240,  241,  246. 

United  Netherlands,  355. 

United  Provinces,  360. 

United  States,  slavery  in,  25,  271; 
constitution  of,  25;  franchise  in, 
30,  33;  relations  of  with  Great  Bri- 
tain, 100;  recognizes  the  Third 
(French)  Republic,  215;  assimila- 
tion of  immigrants  in,  288;  Italians 
in,  348;  participates  in  the  Algeciras 
Conference,  403;  joins  the  Allies  in 
the  Great  War,  484-8;  refuses  to 
accept  the  Treaty  of  Versailles, 
518,  519;  in  1920,  523. 

Universal  Military  Service,  124,  125, 
126,  233,  424,  425. 

Universe,  68,  69. 

Universities,  222,  223. 

University  Tests  Act,  248,  249. 

Unrestricted  Submarine  Warfare,  479, 
480. 


INDEX 


579 


Upper  Austria,  310. 
Urban  Life,  (>(),  (il,  G2.\ 
Usher,  Archbishop,  70. 
Utopia,  74. 

Vatican,  315. 

Vatican  Council,  89,  90,  159. 

Venelia,  131,  349. 

Venice,  15,  481. 

Venizelos,  32G,  335. 

Verdun,  458,  4G1.  475,  47G. 

Veto,  kiuR  of  En^Umd's  power  of  falls 

into  disuse,  255. 
"\'eto     Power"    of    the    House    of 

I>ords,  254. 
Victoria,  Queen  of  Great  Britain  and 

Ireland,  149,  192,  400. 
Vienna,   15,   110,   117,  305,  310,  317, 

517. 
Village   Community   in   Russia,   272, 

389. 
Villeins,  271. 
Viniy,  4S0. 
Virgil,  450. 
Virginia,  372. 

Virginia  Company  of  London,  370. 
Vladivostok,  293,  294,  290,  428. 
Volga  lliver,  12,  13,  280. 
Voltaire,  20,  228,  437. 
Voyage  en  Icarie,  79. 

Wallace,  A.  R.,  71. 

Wallachia,  310;  see  DanuMan  Princi- 
pal it  ic  a. 

War,  end  of  desired,  33,  34;  glorifica- 
tion of  in  the  German  Empire, 
437,  438. 

W^ar  Material,  accumulation  of,  425, 
420,  453,  454. 

War  of  Liberation,  30,  125. 

War  of  the  Nations,  315. 

War  of  the  Spanish  Succession,  115, 
372,  373,  498. 

Wfirsaw,  409,  475,  544. 

Washing,  43w 

Water,  supply  of,  42,  43. 

Waterloo,  Battle  of,  23,  90. 

Watt,  James,  42. 

Wealth,  distribution  of  in  Great 
Britain,  252. 

Weavers,  48. 

Weaving,  45,  40. 

Webb,  Beatrice,  536;  Sidney,  536. 

WVi-hai-wei,  378. 

Weitling,  Wilhelm,  79. 

Wells,  H.  G.,  530. 

Weltmacht  oder  Untergang,  438. 


West  Indies,  372,  373. 

West  Prussia,  170,  514. 

West  Slavs,  310. 

Wliitc  Russians.  285. 

Whitechapel,  252. 

"Wild  Women,"  245. 

Wilhelrnina,  (^ueen  of  the  Nether- 
lands, .357. 

William  I,  German  Emperor,  148, 
119. 

William  II,  German  Empen)r,  char- 
aitcr  of,  149,  l.">0;  statements  of, 
107,  173;  takes  eontrcjl  of  the  gov- 
ernment, 191;  new  jxjiiey  of  with 
Russia,  191,  192;  declaration  of 
concerning  policy,  192;  visits  of 
to  Turkey,  19.'5,  194;  on  (ierman 
.sea  i)ower,  2(tl;  f(, reign  jK)li<y  of, 
2.'!5;  on  European  conditions  in 
1904, 401  ;go«'s  to  Tangier.  401 ;  in  the 
Bosnia-Herzegovina  Crisis,  408;  on 
the  position  of  Erance,  414;  flight 
of.  520. 

William  I,  King  of  the  Netherlands, 
355,  350. 

William  II,  King  of  the  Netherlands, 
357. 

Wilson,  Woodrow.  487,  495,  498; 
character  and  ideals  of,  .500;  "Four- 
teen Points"  of.  500-1;  at  the  Con- 
gress  of  Paris.  .504,  511.  512;  fails 
to  .secure  ratification  of  the  Treaty 
of  Versailles  by  the  United  States, 
518,  519. 

Witte.  Count  Sergei,  291,  299. 

AVoman's  Age,  04. 

Women,  condition  of  improving,  9; 
position  of  in  earlier  times,  62; 
betterment  of  in  the  nineteenth 
century,  0.3.  04;  affected  by  the 
Industrial  Revolution.  04;  position 
of  in  Great  Britain,  242.  243;  move- 
ment to  obtain  suffrage  for, 
241-0. 

Women's  Movement,  in  English- 
speaking  countries,  241,  242;  in 
Great  Britain,  241-0.. 

Women's  Suffrage  Movement,  pro- 
gress of  in  Great  Britain.  243-0;  in 
Norway,  305;  in  Denmark,  307. 
\  Workers.  Industrial,  condition  of,  10; 
condition  of  depressed  by  the  Indus- 
trial Revolution,  48-52;  condition 
of  improved,  52,  53. 

Workingmen's  Com{)ensation  Act, 
249. 

"World  Dominion  or  Downfall," 
191. 


580  INDEX 

Worth,  136.  Ypsilanti,  Prince,  320. 

Wrangel,  General,  544,  545.  Yser  River,  4C4. 

Yudenitch,  General,  544u 
Young,  Arthur,  231. 

Young  Ireland,  37,  2C1.  Zabern  Affair,  147,  1C8. 

Young  Italy,  114.  Zanzibar,  37(). 

Young  Turk  Revolution,  406.  Zcmstvos,  273,  282. 

Young  Turks.  32G.  40G.  Zeppelins,  480. 

Ypres,  15,  404,  475.  Zollverein,  107,  152. 


THE  COUNTKV   LIFE  PRESS,   GAKUEN  CITY,   NEW    VOUK 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


Z    MARIS 

REC'D  tOURt 

j:£B  211986 


Form  L-9-15jn-7,'35 


t» 


)2 


196S 


'Ai\ 


,^ 


UNIVERSITY  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELES 

LTBFARY 


3   1158  00697  5188 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

III   lllll 


AA    000  804  281     4 


